T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CUMHUR\u0130YET\u0130<\/p>\n
ANAYASA MAHKEMES\u0130<\/p>\n
B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM<\/p>\n
KARAR<\/p>\n
M.T. BA\u015eVURUSU (2)<\/p>\n
(Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2021\/58256)<\/p>\n
Karar Tarihi: 25\/3\/2025<\/p>\n
B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM<\/p>\n
KARAR<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fkan<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Hasan Tahsin G\u00d6KCAN<\/p>\n
\u00dcyeler<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Recai AKYEL<\/p>\n
Yusuf \u015eevki HAKYEMEZ<\/p>\n
\u0130rfan F\u0130DAN<\/p>\n
Y\u0131lmaz AK\u00c7\u0130L<\/p>\n
Raport\u00f6r<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Ayd\u0131n DEM\u0130REL<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fvurucu<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Vekili<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Av. Seranur \u00d6ZMEN<\/p>\n
I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130<\/p>\n
1- Ba\u015fvuru, g\u00f6zalt\u0131 s\u00fcresinin makul olmamas\u0131 ve tutukluluk incelemesinin duru\u015fmas\u0131z yap\u0131lmas\u0131 sebebiyle a\u00e7\u0131lan tazminat davas\u0131n\u0131n reddedilmesi nedeniyle ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
A. Ba\u015fvurucu Hakk\u0131ndaki Ceza Soru\u015fturmas\u0131 S\u00fcreci<\/p>\n
2. Antalya Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan otuz be\u015f ki\u015fiyi a\u015fk\u0131n \u015f\u00fcpheli hakk\u0131nda ByLock kulland\u0131klar\u0131 iddias\u0131yla 2017 y\u0131l\u0131nda ba\u015flat\u0131lan bir soru\u015fturma kapsam\u0131nda 22\/5\/2018 tarihinde g\u00f6zalt\u0131 karar\u0131 verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
3. Avukat olan ba\u015fvurucu, evinde bulunamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u00e7in g\u00f6zalt\u0131na al\u0131namam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bunun \u00fczerine ba\u015fvurucu ve di\u011fer bir \u015f\u00fcpheli hakk\u0131nda Fetullah\u00e7\u0131 Ter\u00f6r \u00d6rg\u00fct\u00fc\/Paralel Devlet Yap\u0131lanmas\u0131na (FET\u00d6\/PDY) \u00fcye olma isnad\u0131na dayal\u0131 olarak yakalama emri verilmesi talep edilmi\u015ftir. Talepte, ba\u015fvurucu ve bir \u015f\u00fcphelinin yakalama an\u0131ndan itibaren 24 saat i\u00e7inde Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k nezdinde haz\u0131r edilmeleri, edilemeyecekse Ses ve G\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fc Bili\u015fim Sistemi (SEGB\u0130S) vas\u0131tas\u0131yla Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k taraf\u0131ndan ifadelerinin al\u0131nmas\u0131 i\u00e7in haz\u0131r edilmeleri, yakaland\u0131klar\u0131 yerde SEGB\u0130S yoksa bu sistemin bulundu\u011fu en yak\u0131n yer Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131na sevk edilmeleri, en ge\u00e7 24 saat i\u00e7inde bu i\u015flemler yap\u0131lam\u0131yorsa ayn\u0131 s\u00fcre i\u00e7inde en yak\u0131n sulh ceza h\u00e2kimi \u00f6n\u00fcne \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131larak Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011fa g\u00f6nderilmek \u00fczere haklar\u0131nda sevk tutuklamas\u0131 karar\u0131 verilmesi ve bu hususun yakalama emri karar\u0131nda belirtilmesi istenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
4. Ba\u015fvurucu ve di\u011fer \u015f\u00fcpheli hakk\u0131nda Antalya 5. Sulh Ceza H\u00e2kimli\u011fince 2\/6\/2018 tarihinde yakalama emri \u00e7\u0131kart\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Yakalama karar\u0131nda “…6526 SY ile de\u011fi\u015fik CMK’n\u0131n 94 h\u00fckm\u00fc… kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda \u015f\u00fcphelinin yakalanmas\u0131 halinde sevk tutuklamas\u0131 karar\u0131 verilmesine imkan kalmay\u0131p yakalanmas\u0131 sonras\u0131 yetkili hakim \u00f6n\u00fcne mevcutlu veya SEGB\u0130S sistemi \u00fczerinden \u00e7\u0131kart\u0131l\u0131p sorgusunu takiben tutuklama talebi y\u00f6n\u00fcnden bir karar verilmesi \u015feklinde i\u015flem yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gereklili\u011fi dikkate al\u0131narak, \u015f\u00fcpheliler [H.H.\u00d6.] ve M. T.’nin \u015f\u00fcphesi alt\u0131nda bulunduklar\u0131 silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7unu i\u015flemi\u015f olduklar\u0131na dair somut delillere rastlan\u0131lmas\u0131, \u015f\u00fcphelilerin olay sonras\u0131 temininin m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olmay\u0131\u015f\u0131 itibariyle CMK 94, 98 h\u00fckm\u00fcnde say\u0131lan ifadesinin tespit ve sorgusuna ba\u015fvurulmaya y\u00f6nelik yakalama emri \u00e7\u0131kartmaya yasal ve yeter ko\u015fullar\u0131n olu\u015ftu\u011fu kanaatine var\u0131larak … \u015e\u00fcpheliler yakaland\u0131\u011f\u0131nda CMK 94-98 h\u00fck\u00fcmleri uyar\u0131nca Antalya C. Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131nda savunmas\u0131 al\u0131nmak \u00fczere haz\u0131r edilmesi, m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 taktirde yakaland\u0131\u011f\u0131 yere en yak\u0131n C.Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 huzurunda haz\u0131r edilerek \u00f6ncelikle… SEGB\u0130S vas\u0131tas\u0131yla, Antalya Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan dinlenilmesi i\u00e7in haz\u0131r edilmesi, bu i\u015flemler yap\u0131lam\u0131yorsa CMK 94\/2 gere\u011fi en ge\u00e7 yirmi d\u00f6rt saat i\u00e7inde yakaland\u0131\u011f\u0131 yer adliyesinde, mevcut de\u011fil ise en yak\u0131n adliyede kurulu sesli ve g\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fcl\u00fc ileti\u015fim sisteminin kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 suretiyle yetkili h\u00e2kim veya mahkeme taraf\u0131ndan Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n Tutuklama karar\u0131 verilmesine ili\u015fkin talebi y\u00f6n\u00fcnden SORGULARININ YAPILMASINA…” \u015feklinde yap\u0131lmas\u0131 istenen i\u015flemler belirtilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
5. G\u00fcvenlik g\u00fc\u00e7leri taraf\u0131ndan Burdur’un Bucak il\u00e7esinde oldu\u011fu tespit edilen ba\u015fvurucunun bulundu\u011fu d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fclen evde yap\u0131lan aramada ba\u015fvurucu s\u00f6z konusu yakalama karar\u0131 uyar\u0131nca 3\/3\/2020 tarihinde saat 20.10 s\u0131ralar\u0131nda yakalanm\u0131\u015f, Bucak \u0130l\u00e7e Emniyet M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne (\u0130l\u00e7e Emniyet M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc) getirilmi\u015f, burada saat 22.20 s\u0131ralar\u0131nda \u0130l\u00e7e Emniyet M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne ula\u015fan Antalya Ka\u00e7ak\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k ve Organize Su\u00e7larla M\u00fccadele \u015eube M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc (\u015eube M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc) g\u00f6revlilerine teslim edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
6. Ba\u015fvurucu ve di\u011fer \u015f\u00fcpheliler hakk\u0131ndaki soru\u015fturma, yakalama emri gere\u011fince arama i\u015flemlerinin devam etmesi nedeniyle bir ba\u015fka soru\u015fturmaya kaydedilmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu, m\u00fcsnet su\u00e7tan 3\/3\/2020 tarihinde saat 20.10 itibar\u0131yla 12\/4\/1991 tarihli ve 3713 say\u0131l\u0131 Ter\u00f6rle M\u00fccadele Kanunu’nun (3713 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun) ge\u00e7ici 19. maddesi uyar\u0131nca d\u00f6rt g\u00fcn s\u00fcreyle g\u00f6zalt\u0131na al\u0131nm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k 6\/3\/2020 tarihinde Sulh Ceza H\u00e2kimli\u011finden ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131ndaki g\u00f6zalt\u0131 s\u00fcresinin 7\/3\/2020 tarihinden (saat 20.10) itibaren d\u00f6rt g\u00fcn daha uzat\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 (ilk talep) talep etmi\u015ftir. Talepte Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k, ba\u015fvurucunun ByLock i\u00e7eriklerinin GSM hatt\u0131 arac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131yla tespit edilememesi nedeniyle ByLock ID numaras\u0131n\u0131n tespitine y\u00f6nelik \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma yap\u0131larak ID numaras\u0131n\u0131n tespit edildi\u011fini ve bu bilgiyle ilgili olarak g\u00fcvenlik biriminden ByLock i\u00e7eriklerinin talep edildi\u011fini belirterek \u015eube M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne ByLock i\u00e7eriklerinin hen\u00fcz ula\u015fmam\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131, ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131ndaki ara\u015ft\u0131rma ve delil toplama i\u015fleminin devam ediyor olmas\u0131, sorgulamadaki g\u00fc\u00e7l\u00fck nedenleri ve soru\u015fturma dosyas\u0131n\u0131n eksiksiz tamamlanabilmesi amac\u0131yla istekte bulunuldu\u011funu bildirmi\u015ftir. Antalya 2. Sulh Ceza H\u00e2kimli\u011fince ba\u015fvurucunun g\u00f6zalt\u0131 s\u00fcresinin d\u00f6rt g\u00fcn daha uzat\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
7. Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k 5\/3\/2020 tarihinde ilgili barodan ba\u015fvurucunun beyan etti\u011fi GSM hatlar\u0131, e-posta hesaplar\u0131 gibi t\u00fcm ileti\u015fim bilgilerinin bildirilmesini talep etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
8. 9\/3\/2020 tarihinde kolluk nezdinde, 10\/3\/2020 tarihinde Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k nezdinde ifadesi al\u0131nan ba\u015fvurucu, Antalya 1. Sulh Ceza H\u00e2kimli\u011fi taraf\u0131ndan 10\/3\/2020 tarihinde silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7undan tutuklanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
9. Antalya Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7undan cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 istemiyle haz\u0131rlanan 29\/5\/2020 tarihli iddianamenin kabul edilmesiyle ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda Antalya 8. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesi (A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesi) nezdinde kamu davas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
10. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesi 8\/6\/2020 tarihinde yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 tensip incelemesiyle ba\u015fvurucunun tutukluluk h\u00e2linin devam\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu 29\/9\/2020 tarihli ilk celsede h\u00e2kim \u00f6n\u00fcne \u00e7\u0131km\u0131\u015f, at\u0131l\u0131 su\u00e7a ili\u015fkin savunmalar\u0131 ile tutukluluk h\u00e2line ili\u015fkin itirazlar\u0131n\u0131 dile getirmi\u015ftir. Bu celsede de ba\u015fvurucunun tutukluluk h\u00e2linin devam\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
11. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesi 8\/10\/2020 tarihinde ba\u015fvurucunun ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7undan 6 y\u0131l 3 ay hapis cezas\u0131yla cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na ve h\u00fck\u00fcmle birlikte tahliyesine karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
12. B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi taraf\u0131ndan ba\u015fvurucunun istinaf talebi 10\/11\/2021 tarihinde esastan reddedilmi\u015f olup an\u0131lan h\u00fckme kar\u015f\u0131 yap\u0131lan temyiz kanun yolu incelemesi devam etmektedir.<\/p>\n
B. Ba\u015fvurucu Hakk\u0131ndaki Tazminat Davas\u0131 S\u00fcreci<\/p>\n
13. Ba\u015fvurucu 11\/2\/2021 tarihli dilek\u00e7eyle 4\/12\/2004 tarihli ve 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 Ceza Muhakemesi Kanunu’nun 141. maddesi uyar\u0131nca hakk\u0131nda uygulanan koruma tedbirleri nedeniyle 50.000 TL manevi tazminat\u0131n \u00f6denmesini talep etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
14. Ba\u015fvurucu, 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 94. maddesinin (1) numaral\u0131 f\u0131kras\u0131 gere\u011fince do\u011frudan yetkili h\u00e2kim \u00f6n\u00fcne \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekirken g\u00f6zalt\u0131na al\u0131nmas\u0131n\u0131n hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011funu, tek ba\u015f\u0131na g\u00f6zalt\u0131na al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 h\u00e2lde toplu su\u00e7un varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 kabul edilerek hakk\u0131nda 3713 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’da \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen d\u00f6rt g\u00fcnl\u00fck g\u00f6zalt\u0131 s\u00fcresinin haks\u0131z olarak uyguland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, ter\u00f6r su\u00e7u olsa da \u00fc\u00e7 ki\u015fiden az say\u0131da ki\u015finin g\u00f6zalt\u0131na al\u0131nmas\u0131 durumunda 24 veya 48 saatlik g\u00f6zalt\u0131 s\u00fcrelerinin uygulanmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi h\u00e2lde kendisinin yedi g\u00fcn s\u00fcreyle kanuna ayk\u0131r\u0131 olarak g\u00f6zalt\u0131nda tutuldu\u011funu dilek\u00e7esinde belirtmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu ayr\u0131ca d\u00f6rt g\u00fcnl\u00fck g\u00f6zalt\u0131 s\u00fcresinin mutlaka sonuna kadar t\u00fcketilmesi gerekmedi\u011fini, g\u00f6zalt\u0131 s\u00fcresinde yap\u0131lacak soru\u015fturma i\u015flemi kalmasa da ki\u015finin g\u00f6zalt\u0131 s\u00fcresi bitene kadar g\u00f6zalt\u0131nda bekletilmesinin hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011funu, keyf\u00ee olarak yedi g\u00fcn g\u00f6zalt\u0131nda tutuldu\u011funu, 10\/3\/2020 tarihinde tutukland\u0131ktan sonra makul s\u00fcre i\u00e7inde h\u00e2kim \u00f6n\u00fcne \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, 29\/9\/2020 tarihli celsede h\u00e2kim \u00f6n\u00fcne \u00e7\u0131kma imk\u00e2n\u0131 buldu\u011funu, sulh ceza h\u00e2kimi \u00f6n\u00fcne \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n h\u00e2kim \u00f6n\u00fcne \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lma olarak kabul edilemeyece\u011fini, 29\/9\/2020 tarihine kadar tutukluluk incelemelerinin ve tahliye taleplerinin dosya \u00fczerinden incelendi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
15. Burdur A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesi (A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesi) 16\/6\/2021 tarihinde ba\u015fvurucunun manevi tazminat talebinin reddine, ba\u015fvurucu aleyhine Avukatl\u0131k Asgari \u00dccret Tarifesi uyar\u0131nca 8.200 TL maktu vek\u00e2let \u00fccretine karar vermi\u015ftir. Gerek\u00e7enin ilgili k\u0131sm\u0131 \u015f\u00f6yledir:<\/p>\n
“…davac\u0131n\u0131n 03.03.2020 tarihinde Burdur ili Bucak il\u00e7esinde g\u00f6zalt\u0131na al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve 4 (d\u00f6rt) g\u00fcn g\u00f6zalt\u0131 karar\u0131 verildi\u011fi, 06.03.2020 tarihinde Antalya Sulh Ceza Hakimli\u011fi taraf\u0131ndan g\u00f6zalt\u0131 s\u00fcresinin yine 4 (d\u00f6rt) g\u00fcn s\u00fcreyle uzat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve 10.03.2020 tarihinde hakim \u00f6n\u00fcne \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, 3713 say\u0131l\u0131 Ter\u00f6rle M\u00fccadele Kanunu’nun ge\u00e7ici 19. maddesinde toplu olarak i\u015flenen ter\u00f6r su\u00e7lar\u0131nda 4 (d\u00f6rt) g\u00fcn g\u00f6zalt\u0131na alma karar\u0131 verilebilece\u011finin ve ihtiya\u00e7 halinde hakim karar\u0131yla bu s\u00fcrenin iki defa uzat\u0131labilece\u011finin belirtildi\u011fi, davac\u0131n\u0131n i\u015fledi\u011fi iddia edilen ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7unun toplu i\u015flenen bir su\u00e7 oldu\u011fu, bu durumda TCK’nun 141\/1-b ve 141\/1-d maddeleri uyar\u0131nca kanuni s\u00fcre ge\u00e7tikten sonra hakim \u00f6n\u00fcne \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n kabul edilemeyece\u011fi, tutuklama karar\u0131n\u0131n Sulh Ceza Hakimli\u011fince verilmi\u015f olmas\u0131 sebebiyle de davac\u0131n\u0131n ilk olarak 29.09.2020 tarihinde A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesi huzurunda hakim kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131na \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n kabul edilemeyece\u011fi, yap\u0131lan i\u015flemlerin usule ve kanuna uygun oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan davac\u0131n\u0131n manevi tazminat isteminin reddine…”<\/p>\n
16. Antalya B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi taraf\u0131ndan 14\/10\/2021 tarihinde, vek\u00e2let \u00fccreti 7.300 TL olarak d\u00fczeltilmek suretiyle ba\u015fvurucunun istinaf kanun yolu ba\u015fvurusunun reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
17. Nihai karar ba\u015fvurucuya 15\/11\/2021 tarihinde tebli\u011f edilmi\u015f ve ba\u015fvurucu 30\/11\/2021 tarihinde bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
18. 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
A. Ki\u015fi H\u00fcrriyeti ve G\u00fcvenli\u011fi Hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130hlal Edildi\u011fine \u0130li\u015fkin \u0130ddia<\/p>\n
19. Ba\u015fvurucu, g\u00f6zalt\u0131 tedbiri s\u00fcresinin makul olmamas\u0131 ve tutukluluk incelemesinin duru\u015fmas\u0131z yap\u0131lmas\u0131 nedeniyle a\u00e7t\u0131\u011f\u0131 tazminat davas\u0131n\u0131n reddedildi\u011fini belirterek ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
20. Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 (Bakanl\u0131k) g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnde; Anayasa ve ilgili mevzuat h\u00fck\u00fcmleri, Anayasa Mahkemesi i\u00e7tihatlar\u0131 ile somut olay\u0131n kendine \u00f6zg\u00fc ko\u015fullar\u0131 g\u00f6z\u00f6n\u00fcne al\u0131narak de\u011ferlendirme yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi ifade edilmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu, Bakanl\u0131k g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne kar\u015f\u0131 ba\u015fvuru formundaki iddialar\u0131na benzer itirazlarda bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
21. Anayasa Mahkemesi, kanunda \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen g\u00f6zalt\u0131 s\u00fcresinin a\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 veya yakalama ve g\u00f6zalt\u0131na al\u0131nman\u0131n hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011fu iddialar\u0131 ile ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc h\u00e2l \u015fartlar\u0131 alt\u0131nda ge\u00e7ici bir s\u00fcre i\u00e7in azami olarak otuz g\u00fcne kadar uygulanan g\u00f6zalt\u0131 s\u00fcresinin uzunlu\u011funun makul olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u015fik\u00e2yetlerine ili\u015fkin olarak bireysel ba\u015fvurunun incelendi\u011fi tarih itibar\u0131yla as\u0131l dava sonu\u00e7lanmam\u0131\u015f da olsa 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 141. maddesinde \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen tazminat davas\u0131 a\u00e7ma imk\u00e2n\u0131n\u0131n t\u00fcketilmesi gereken etkili bir hukuk yolu oldu\u011fu sonucuna varm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r (Hikmet Kopar ve di\u011ferleri, \u00a7\u00a7 64-72; Hidayet Karaca [GK], B. No: 2015\/144, 14\/7\/2015, \u00a7\u00a7 53-64; G\u00fcnay Da\u011f ve di\u011ferleri [GK], B. No: 2013\/1631, 17\/12\/2015, \u00a7\u00a7 141-150; \u0130brahim S\u00f6nmez ve Nazmiye Kaya, B. No: 2013\/3193, 15\/10\/2015, \u00a7\u00a7 34-47; Neslihan Aksakal, B. No: 2016\/42456, 26\/12\/2017, \u00a7\u00a7 30-37).<\/p>\n
22. Tutukluluk incelemesinin duru\u015fmas\u0131z yap\u0131lmas\u0131 \u015fik\u00e2yetine ili\u015fkin olarak ise Salih S\u00f6nmez (B. No: 2016\/25431, 28\/11\/2018) karar\u0131nda yap\u0131lan incelemede, ba\u015fvurucunun h\u00e2kim\/mahkeme \u00f6n\u00fcne \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, bu nedenle verilecek bir ihlal karar\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015fvurucunun yeniden h\u00e2kim \u00f6n\u00fcne \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 ve serbest kalmas\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamayaca\u011f\u0131 belirtilmi\u015ftir. Anayasa Mahkemesi, bu ba\u011flamda yaln\u0131zca ki\u015finin uzun s\u00fcre h\u00e2kim\/mahkeme \u00f6n\u00fcne \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmamas\u0131yla ilgili bir hak ihlalinin tespiti ve gerekiyorsa belli bir miktar tazminata h\u00fckmedilmesiyle yetinilece\u011fi de\u011ferlendirmesini yapm\u0131\u015f ve ilgili Yarg\u0131tay i\u00e7tihatlar\u0131na at\u0131f yaparak as\u0131l dava sonu\u00e7lanmam\u0131\u015f da olsa 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 141. maddesinin (1) numaral\u0131 f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n (d) bendinde \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen tazminat davas\u0131 a\u00e7ma imk\u00e2n\u0131n\u0131n t\u00fcketilmesi gereken etkili bir hukuk yolu oldu\u011fu sonucuna varm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r (Salih S\u00f6nmez, \u00a7\u00a7 164-167).<\/p>\n
23. Ba\u015fvurucu taraf\u0131ndan g\u00f6zalt\u0131 s\u00fcresinin makul olmamas\u0131 ve tutukluluk incelemesinin duru\u015fmas\u0131z yap\u0131lmas\u0131 \u015fik\u00e2yetine ili\u015fkin olarak 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 141. maddesi uyar\u0131nca tazminat davas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvuru yollar\u0131n\u0131 t\u00fcketti\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lan ba\u015fvurucunun \u015fik\u00e2yetlerinin 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 de\u011ferlendirilmekle ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddialar\u0131n kabul edilebilir oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
1. G\u00f6zalt\u0131 S\u00fcresinin Makul Olmamas\u0131 Nedeniyle Ki\u015fi H\u00fcrriyeti ve G\u00fcvenli\u011fi Hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130hlal Edildi\u011fine \u0130li\u015fkin \u0130ddia<\/p>\n
24. Ba\u015fvurucu, g\u00f6zalt\u0131 s\u00fcresinin makul olmamas\u0131 nedenine dayanan tazminat davas\u0131n\u0131n reddedilmesi sebebiyle ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
25. Ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131 devletin bireylerin \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne keyf\u00ee olarak m\u00fcdahale etmemesini g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na alan temel bir hakt\u0131r (Erdem G\u00fcl ve Can D\u00fcndar [GK], B. No: 2015\/18567, 25\/2\/2016, \u00a7 62).<\/p>\n
26. Anayasa Mahkemesi, Anayasa’n\u0131n 19. maddesi kapsam\u0131nda h\u00fcrriyetten yoksun b\u0131rakma kavram\u0131n\u0131 tan\u0131mlam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Buna g\u00f6re h\u00fcrriyetten yoksun b\u0131rakma, bir kimsenin k\u0131s\u0131tl\u0131 bir alanda ihmal edilemeyecek bir s\u00fcre i\u00e7in tutulmas\u0131 ve s\u00f6z konusu tutmaya r\u0131za g\u00f6stermemi\u015f olmas\u0131 \u015feklinde ifade edilebilecek iki unsuru i\u00e7ermektedir (C\u00fcneyt Kartal, B. No: 2013\/6572, 20\/3\/2014, \u00a7 17).<\/p>\n
27. Maddenin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131nda ge\u00e7en h\u00fcrriyet s\u00f6zc\u00fc\u011f\u00fc, \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fck ve ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131zl\u0131\u011f\u0131n yan\u0131 s\u0131ra serbestlik anlam\u0131na da gelmektedir. Bu anlamda ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyetine y\u00f6nelik bir m\u00fcdahalenin bulundu\u011funun s\u00f6ylenebilmesi i\u00e7in ki\u015finin hareket serbest\u00eesinin maddi olarak s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131 gerekir. Buradaki hareket serbest\u00eesine y\u00f6nelik k\u0131s\u0131tlama, Anayasa’n\u0131n 23. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan seyahat h\u00fcrriyetine y\u00f6nelik bir m\u00fcdahaleye g\u00f6re \u00e7ok daha yo\u011fundur. Ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131na y\u00f6nelik bir m\u00fcdahale i\u00e7in ki\u015fi, r\u0131zas\u0131 olmaks\u0131z\u0131n en az\u0131ndan rahats\u0131zl\u0131k verecek uzunlukta bir s\u00fcre boyunca belirli bir yerde fiziki olarak tutulmal\u0131d\u0131r (Galip \u00d6\u011f\u00fct [GK], B. No: 2014\/5863, 1\/3\/2017, \u00a7 34).<\/p>\n
28. Anayasa’n\u0131n 19. maddesinin metni bir b\u00fct\u00fcn olarak de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde maddenin ikinci ve \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc f\u0131kralar\u0131ndaki s\u0131n\u0131rlama sebeplerinin ki\u015filerin fiziksel \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fcklerine ili\u015fkin oldu\u011fu, ayr\u0131ca devam eden f\u0131kralardaki g\u00fcvencelerin de fiziki olarak h\u00fcrriyetinden yoksun b\u0131rak\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ki\u015filer bak\u0131m\u0131ndan getirildi\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131n\u0131n g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u015fey bireylerin yaln\u0131zca fiziksel \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcd\u00fcr (Galip \u00d6\u011f\u00fct, \u00a7 35).<\/p>\n
29. Anayasa’n\u0131n 19. maddesinin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131nda herkesin ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131na sahip oldu\u011fu ilke olarak konulduktan sonra ikinci ve \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc f\u0131kralar\u0131nda \u015fekil ve \u015fartlar\u0131 kanunda g\u00f6sterilmek kayd\u0131yla ki\u015filerin \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnden mahrum b\u0131rak\u0131labilece\u011fi durumlar s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 olarak say\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Maddenin d\u00f6rd\u00fcnc\u00fc, be\u015finci, alt\u0131nc\u0131, yedinci ve sekizinci f\u0131kralar\u0131nda, ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131na m\u00fcdahalede bulunulan ki\u015filere tan\u0131nan g\u00fcvencelere ili\u015fkin d\u00fczenlemelere yer verilmi\u015ftir (Safkan Aydo\u011fdu, B. No: 2014\/7498, 5\/4\/2017, \u00a7 43). Bu ba\u011flamda an\u0131lan f\u0131kralarda yakalama veya tutuklama sebepleri ile iddialar\u0131n bildirilmesi, yakalanan ki\u015finin h\u00e2kim \u00f6n\u00fcne \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lma s\u00fcresi, yakalama veya tutuklaman\u0131n yak\u0131nlara bildirilmesi, tutuklanan ki\u015filerin makul s\u00fcrede yarg\u0131lanmay\u0131 ve soru\u015fturma veya kovu\u015fturma s\u0131ras\u0131nda serbest b\u0131rak\u0131lmay\u0131 isteme hakk\u0131, h\u00fcrriyetten yoksun b\u0131rak\u0131lmaya kar\u015f\u0131 yarg\u0131 merciine ba\u015fvurma hakk\u0131 g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
30. Anayasa’n\u0131n 19. maddesinin dokuzuncu f\u0131kras\u0131nda ise bu esaslar d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda bir i\u015fleme tabi tutulan ki\u015filerin u\u011frad\u0131klar\u0131 zararlar\u0131n tazminat hukukunun genel prensiplerine g\u00f6re devlet taraf\u0131ndan \u00f6denece\u011fi ifade edilmi\u015ftir. An\u0131lan f\u0131krada yer alan “bu esaslar d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda bir i\u015fleme t\u00e2bi tutulan ki\u015filer” tabiri ile maddenin di\u011fer t\u00fcm f\u0131kralar\u0131nda belirtilen kurallara ayk\u0131r\u0131 bir i\u015fleme tabi k\u0131l\u0131nman\u0131n ki\u015fiye tazminat hakk\u0131 do\u011furdu\u011fu belirtilmi\u015ftir. Buna g\u00f6re maddenin ikinci veya \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc f\u0131kralar\u0131nda belirtilen durumlara ayk\u0131r\u0131 \u015fekilde ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131na m\u00fcdahalede bulunulmas\u0131 ya da ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131na m\u00fcdahale edilen kimsenin maddenin d\u00f6rd\u00fcnc\u00fc, be\u015finci, alt\u0131nc\u0131, yedinci ve sekizinci f\u0131kralar\u0131ndaki g\u00fcvencelerden yararland\u0131r\u0131lmamas\u0131 h\u00e2linde u\u011fran\u0131lan zararlar devlet taraf\u0131ndan \u00f6denecektir (Safkan Aydo\u011fdu, \u00a7 44).<\/p>\n
31. Anayasa’n\u0131n 19. maddesinin ikinci ve \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc f\u0131kralar\u0131 bir b\u00fct\u00fcn olarak de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde su\u00e7 isnad\u0131na ba\u011fl\u0131 olarak bir kimsenin kamu makamlar\u0131nca \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnden yoksun b\u0131rak\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n tutuklama veya yakalama yoluyla ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilebilece\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. An\u0131lan f\u0131kralarda s\u00f6z\u00fc edilen yakalama kavram\u0131 \u00f6zerk bir anlama sahip olup 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’da d\u00fczenlenen yakalama m\u00fcessesesinden daha geni\u015f bir i\u00e7eri\u011fe sahiptir. Anayasal anlamda su\u00e7 isnad\u0131na ba\u011fl\u0131 yakalama, ki\u015finin fiziksel \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnden yoksun b\u0131rak\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 andan tutukland\u0131\u011f\u0131 veya tutuklanmaks\u0131z\u0131n serbest b\u0131rak\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 ana kadar devam eden t\u00fcm s\u00fcreci kapsamaktad\u0131r. Bu ba\u011flamda Anayasa’n\u0131n 19. maddesinde d\u00fczenlenen yakalama kurumunun 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’daki g\u00f6zalt\u0131n\u0131 da kapsad\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6ylenebilir.<\/p>\n
32. Yakalama suretiyle ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131na y\u00f6nelik m\u00fcdahale -temel hak ve \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fcklerin s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na ili\u015fkin \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fctlerin belirlendi\u011fi Anayasa’n\u0131n 13. maddesinde belirtilen ko\u015fullara uygun olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 m\u00fcddet\u00e7e- Anayasa’n\u0131n 19. maddesinin ihlalini te\u015fkil edecektir. Bu sebeple s\u0131n\u0131rlaman\u0131n Anayasa’n\u0131n 13. maddesinde \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen ve yakalama tedbirinin niteli\u011fine uygun d\u00fc\u015fen kanun taraf\u0131ndan \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclme, Anayasa’n\u0131n ilgili maddelerinde belirtilen hakl\u0131 sebeplerden bir veya daha fazlas\u0131na dayanma ve \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcl\u00fcl\u00fck ilkesine ayk\u0131r\u0131 olmama ko\u015fullar\u0131na uygun olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n belirlenmesi gerekir (tutuklama tedbirine ili\u015fkin olarak benzer de\u011ferlendirme i\u00e7in bkz. Halas Aslan, B. No: 2014\/4994, 16\/2\/2017, \u00a7\u00a7 53, 54).<\/p>\n
33. ByLock kullan\u0131c\u0131s\u0131 oldu\u011fu iddia edilen ve silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7lamas\u0131yla 2\/6\/2018 tarihinde hakk\u0131nda yakalama karar\u0131 \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lan ba\u015fvurucunun3\/3\/2020 tarihinde 3713 say\u0131l\u0131 Ter\u00f6rle M\u00fccadele Kanunu’nun ge\u00e7ici 19. maddesi uyar\u0131nca d\u00f6rt g\u00fcn s\u00fcreyle g\u00f6zalt\u0131na al\u0131nmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015f ve bu s\u00fcre daha sonra hakim karar\u0131 ile bir kez uzat\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r (bkz. \u00a7 6).<\/p>\n
34. Anayasa Mahkemesi 3713 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un ge\u00e7ici 19. maddesinin Anayasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ileri s\u00fcr\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ba\u015fvuruda bir tak\u0131m tespitlerde bulunmu\u015ftur. \u00d6ncelikle s\u00f6z konusu d\u00fczenlemede g\u00f6zalt\u0131 s\u00fcresinin uzat\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n usul ve \u015fartlar\u0131n\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131k ve net olarak d\u00fczenlendi\u011fi g\u00f6zetildi\u011finde kuralla \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen s\u0131n\u0131rlaman\u0131n kanuni bir temele dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131k oldu\u011fu belirtilmi\u015ftir. Ard\u0131ndan g\u00f6zalt\u0131 s\u00fcrelerini uzatan ve h\u00e2kim karar\u0131yla ek g\u00f6zalt\u0131 s\u00fcresi verilmesi imk\u00e2n\u0131n\u0131 tan\u0131yan kurallar\u0131n \u00f6zellikle ter\u00f6r ve \u00f6rg\u00fct faaliyetleri kapsam\u0131nda i\u015flenen su\u00e7lar bak\u0131m\u0131ndan, bu su\u00e7larla m\u00fccadele etmenin zorlu\u011fu, \u015f\u00fcphelilerin \u00f6rg\u00fct ba\u011flant\u0131lar\u0131n\u0131n \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fclmesinin zaman almas\u0131, somut delillere ula\u015fmadaki sorunlar nedeniyle ceza soru\u015fturmas\u0131n\u0131n sa\u011fl\u0131kl\u0131 bir \u015fekilde y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclebilmesi ve b\u00f6ylelikle su\u00e7la etkin m\u00fccadele edilerek ki\u015filerin hak ve \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fckleri ile kamu d\u00fczeninin korunmas\u0131na y\u00f6nelik me\u015fru bir amaca dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131 ifade edilmi\u015ftir. Sonu\u00e7 olarak etkin ve sa\u011fl\u0131kl\u0131 bir \u015fekilde soru\u015fturma yap\u0131lmak suretiyle ki\u015filerin hak ve \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fckleri ile kamu d\u00fczeninin korunmas\u0131na amac\u0131na ula\u015fma bak\u0131m\u0131ndan elveri\u015fli ve gerekli olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6ylenemeyece\u011fi belirtilen kural\u0131n ki\u015fi \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131na bir orant\u0131s\u0131z s\u0131n\u0131rlama getirmedi\u011finden Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 13. ve 19. maddelerine ayk\u0131r\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 tespitinde bulunulmu\u015ftur(E.2018\/137, K.2022\/86, 30\/06\/2022, \u00a7 263-291).<\/p>\n
35. Ba\u015fvurucu taraf\u0131ndan kanuni dayana\u011f\u0131 ve \u00f6n ko\u015ful olan su\u00e7 i\u015fledi\u011fine dair somut belirtilerin bulundu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lan g\u00f6zalt\u0131 s\u00fcresinin makul olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddia edilmi\u015ftir. Yakalama ve g\u00f6zalt\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcl\u00fc olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n de\u011ferlendirilirken yakalama tedbirine ba\u015fvurulmas\u0131n\u0131n gerek\u00e7esi, kamu makamlar\u0131n\u0131n ve ba\u015fvurucunun tutumu ile g\u00f6zalt\u0131 s\u00fcresi g\u00f6z\u00f6n\u00fcnde bulundurulur.<\/p>\n
36. Ba\u015fvurucunun da aralar\u0131nda oldu\u011fu yakla\u015f\u0131k otuz be\u015f ki\u015fi hakk\u0131nda Antalya Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan 2017 y\u0131l\u0131nda soru\u015fturma ba\u015flat\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r Ba\u015fvurucu 2\/6\/2018 tarihinde verilen yakalama karar\u0131 uyar\u0131nca 3\/3\/2020 tarihinde yakalanm\u0131\u015f ve Bucak \u0130l\u00e7e Emniyet M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne getirilmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu burada saat 22.20 s\u0131ralar\u0131nda \u0130l\u00e7e Emniyet M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne ula\u015fan Antalya Ka\u00e7ak\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k ve Organize Su\u00e7larla M\u00fccadele \u015eube M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc g\u00f6revlilerine teslim edilmi\u015ftir. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla ba\u015fvurucu yakalanmas\u0131ndan itibaren 24 saat i\u00e7inde soru\u015fturmay\u0131 y\u00fcr\u00fcten Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k olan Antalya Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n yetki alan\u0131na getirilmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu yakaland\u0131ktan sonra delillerin toplanmas\u0131 amac\u0131yla soru\u015fturman\u0131n geni\u015fletilip geni\u015fletilmeyece\u011fi, ba\u015fvurucunun g\u00f6zalt\u0131na al\u0131n\u0131p al\u0131nmayaca\u011f\u0131 gibi hususlar soru\u015fturmay\u0131 y\u00fcr\u00fcten Antalya Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131nca takdir edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
37. Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 19. maddesinin be\u015finci f\u0131kras\u0131na g\u00f6re yakalanan veya tutuklanan ki\u015fi, tutulma yerine en yak\u0131n mahkemeye g\u00f6nderilmesi i\u00e7in gerekli s\u00fcre hari\u00e7 en ge\u00e7 k\u0131rk sekiz saat ve toplu olarak i\u015flenen su\u00e7larda en \u00e7ok d\u00f6rt g\u00fcn i\u00e7inde h\u00e2kim \u00f6n\u00fcne \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131l\u0131r. 3713 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 19. maddesi uyar\u0131nca delillerin toplanmas\u0131ndaki g\u00fc\u00e7l\u00fck veya dosyan\u0131n kapsaml\u0131 olmas\u0131 nedeniyle g\u00f6zalt\u0131 s\u00fcresi iki defa uzat\u0131labilir. Bu \u00e7er\u00e7evede 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 2. maddesi uyar\u0131nca aralar\u0131nda i\u015ftirak iradesi bulunmasa da \u00fc\u00e7 veya daha fazla ki\u015fi taraf\u0131ndan i\u015flenen su\u00e7 olarak tan\u0131mlanan toplu su\u00e7un faillerinden oldu\u011fu de\u011ferlendirilen ba\u015fvurucu y\u00f6n\u00fcnden Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k\u00e7a g\u00f6zalt\u0131 s\u00fcresinin d\u00f6rt g\u00fcn olarak takdir edilmesinde keyf\u00eelik bulunmamaktad\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucunun s\u00f6z konusu g\u00f6zalt\u0131 s\u00fcresinin keyfi oldu\u011fu, bu s\u00fcre i\u00e7erisinde adli makamlar\u0131n hareketsiz kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddias\u0131 da bulunmamaktad\u0131r. FET\u00d6\/PDY ile ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 soru\u015fturman\u0131n kapsam\u0131 ve niteli\u011finin yan\u0131 s\u0131ra ByLock i\u00e7eriklerinin hen\u00fcz ula\u015fmam\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131, ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131ndaki ara\u015ft\u0131rma ve delil toplama i\u015fleminin devam ediyor olmas\u0131, sorgulamadaki g\u00fc\u00e7l\u00fck nedenleriyle g\u00f6zalt\u0131n\u0131n bir defa daha d\u00f6rt g\u00fcnl\u00fck s\u00fcre ile uzat\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n da makul olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6ylenemez.<\/p>\n
38. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle ba\u015fvurucunun ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131na yap\u0131lan m\u00fcdahalenin Anayasa’n\u0131n 19. maddesinin be\u015finci f\u0131kras\u0131ndaki esaslara ayk\u0131r\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 sonucuna var\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
39. Anayasa’n\u0131n 19. maddesinin dokuzuncu f\u0131kras\u0131 ba\u011flam\u0131nda tazminat hakk\u0131 ancak maddenin ilk sekiz f\u0131kras\u0131ndaki esaslara ayk\u0131r\u0131 bir durumun varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 h\u00e2linde s\u00f6z konusu olabilir. Ba\u015fvurucu bak\u0131m\u0131ndan yukar\u0131da bu y\u00f6nde bir tespit s\u00f6z konusu olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u00e7in Anayasa’n\u0131n 19. maddesinin dokuzuncu f\u0131kras\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden farkl\u0131 bir de\u011ferlendirme yap\u0131lmas\u0131na gerek bulunmamaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
2. Tutukluluk \u0130ncelemesinin Duru\u015fmas\u0131z Yap\u0131lmas\u0131 Nedeniyle Ki\u015fi H\u00fcrriyeti ve G\u00fcvenli\u011fi Hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130hlal Edildi\u011fine \u0130li\u015fkin \u0130ddia<\/p>\n
40. Ba\u015fvurucu 10\/3\/2020 tarihinde tutukland\u0131ktan sonra 29\/9\/2020 tarihine kadar tutukluluk incelemelerinin dosya \u00fczerinden yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ifade ederek a\u00e7t\u0131\u011f\u0131 tazminat davas\u0131n\u0131n reddine karar verilmesi nedeniyle ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
41. Anayasa’n\u0131n 19. maddesinin sekizinci f\u0131kras\u0131 uyar\u0131nca h\u00fcrriyeti k\u0131s\u0131tlanan ki\u015fi k\u0131sa s\u00fcrede durumu hakk\u0131nda karar verilmesini ve bu k\u0131s\u0131tlaman\u0131n kanuna ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 h\u00e2linde hemen serbest b\u0131rak\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamak amac\u0131yla yetkili bir yarg\u0131 merciine ba\u015fvurma hakk\u0131na sahiptir (Mehmet Haberal, B. No: 2012\/849, 4\/12\/2013, \u00a7 122).<\/p>\n
42. Anayasa’n\u0131n 19. maddesinin sekizinci f\u0131kras\u0131ndan kaynaklanan temel g\u00fcvencelerden biri de tutuklulu\u011fa kar\u015f\u0131 itiraz\u0131n h\u00e2kim \u00f6n\u00fcnde yap\u0131lan duru\u015fmalarda etkin olarak incelenmesi hakk\u0131d\u0131r. Zira h\u00fcrriyetinden yoksun b\u0131rak\u0131lan kimsenin bu duruma ili\u015fkin \u015fik\u00e2yetlerini, tutuklanmas\u0131na dayanak olan delillerin i\u00e7eri\u011fine veya nitelendirilmesine y\u00f6nelik iddialar\u0131n\u0131, lehine ve aleyhine olan g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f ve de\u011ferlendirmelere kar\u015f\u0131 beyanlar\u0131n\u0131 h\u00e2kim\/mahkeme \u00f6n\u00fcnde s\u00f6zl\u00fc olarak dile getirebilme imk\u00e2n\u0131na sahip olmas\u0131, tutuklulu\u011fa itiraz\u0131n\u0131 \u00e7ok daha etkili bir \u015fekilde yapmas\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flayacakt\u0131r. Bu nedenle ki\u015fi, bu haktan d\u00fczenli bir \u015fekilde yararlanarak makul aral\u0131klarla dinlenilmeyi talep edebilmelidir (Firas Aslan ve Hebat Aslan, B. No: 2012\/1158, 21\/11\/2013 \u00a7 66; S\u00fcleyman Ba\u011fr\u0131yan\u0131k ve di\u011ferleri, B. No: 2015\/9756, 16\/11\/2016, \u00a7 267; Ayd\u0131n Yavuz ve di\u011ferleri, \u00a7 333).<\/p>\n
43. Anayasa Mahkemesinin Anayasa’n\u0131n 19. maddesinin dokuzuncu f\u0131kras\u0131nda g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan tazminat hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edilip edilmedi\u011fini belirleyebilmesi yani Anayasa’n\u0131n 19. maddesinin dokuzuncu f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n uygulanabilmesi i\u00e7in ba\u015fvurucunun an\u0131lan maddenin di\u011fer f\u0131kralar\u0131nda belirtilen esaslar d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda bir i\u015fleme tabi tutulup tutulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n derece mahkemelerince ya da Anayasa Mahkemesince tespit edilmesi gerekir. Bu ba\u011flamda ki\u015finin Anayasa’n\u0131n 19. maddesinin ilk sekiz f\u0131kras\u0131nda belirtilen esaslara ayk\u0131r\u0131 bir i\u015fleme tabi tutuldu\u011fu, bu kapsamda u\u011frad\u0131\u011f\u0131 zarar\u0131n devlet taraf\u0131ndan tazminat hukukunun genel prensiplerine g\u00f6re \u00f6denmedi\u011fi veya bir tazminat imk\u00e2n\u0131n\u0131n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 tespit edilirse Anayasa’n\u0131n 19. maddesinin dokuzuncu f\u0131kras\u0131nda g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan tazminat hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlali s\u00f6z konusu olacakt\u0131r (M.E., B. No: 2018\/696, 9\/5\/2019, \u00a7 46).<\/p>\n
44. Somut olayda ba\u015fvurucu 10\/3\/2020 tarihinde tutuklanm\u0131\u015f, tutukluluk incelemesi 9\/4\/2020, 8\/5\/2020 ve 2\/6\/2020 tarihinde sulh ceza h\u00e2kimi taraf\u0131ndan ba\u015fvurucunun yoklu\u011funda ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilmi\u015ftir. 2\/6\/2020, 7\/7\/2020, 5\/8\/2020 ve 3\/9\/2020 tarihinde A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesince ba\u015fvurucunun yoklu\u011funda tutuklulu\u011fun devam\u0131na karar verilmi\u015f, ba\u015fvurucu taraf\u0131ndan tutuklulu\u011fa y\u00f6nelik itirazlar ilk kez 29\/9\/2020 tarihli duru\u015fmada ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclebilmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucunun tutukland\u0131\u011f\u0131 10\/3\/2020 tarihi ile ilk kez mahkeme huzuruna \u00e7\u0131kt\u0131\u011f\u0131 29\/9\/2020 tarihi aras\u0131nda 6 ay 19 g\u00fcn s\u00fcreyle h\u00e2kim\/mahkeme huzuruna \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
45. Anayasa Mahkemesi; Mehmet Halim Oral (B. No: 2012\/1221, 16\/10\/2014, \u00a7 53) ve Ferit \u00c7elik (B. No: 2012\/1220, 10\/12\/2014, \u00a7 53) kararlar\u0131nda ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n tutukluluk durumunun 7 ay 2 g\u00fcn, Ula\u015f Kaya ve Adnan Ataman (B. No: 2013\/4128, 18\/11\/2015, \u00a7 61) karar\u0131nda 3 ay 17 g\u00fcn, M.S. (B. No: 2020\/15221, 5\/10\/2023, \u00a7\u00a7 64-73) karar\u0131nda 2 ay 26 g\u00fcn, \u00d6nder \u00c7etin (B. No: 2020\/35096 14\/12\/2023, \u00a7\u00a7 42-57) karar\u0131nda 2 ay 15 g\u00fcn boyunca duru\u015fma yap\u0131lmaks\u0131z\u0131n dosya \u00fczerinden ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilen incelemeler sonucunda verilen kararlarla devam ettirilmesinin Anayasa’n\u0131n 19. maddesinin sekizinci f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131 ihlal etti\u011fi sonucuna varm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
46. Ba\u015fvuruya konu olan karma\u015f\u0131k oldu\u011fu de\u011ferlendirilemeyecek davada ba\u015fvurucunun tutukluluk h\u00e2linin 6 ay 19 g\u00fcn s\u00fcreyle duru\u015fmas\u0131z olarak incelenmesi Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 19. maddesinin sekizinci f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n gereklilikleriyle ba\u011fda\u015fmamaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
47. Somut olayda derece mahkemeleri ba\u015fvurucunun a\u00e7t\u0131\u011f\u0131 tazminat davas\u0131n\u0131 reddetmi\u015ftir. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla ba\u015fvurucu, Anayasa’n\u0131n 19. maddesinin sekizinci f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n ihlali nedeniyle herhangi bir tazminat elde edememi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
48. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle Anayasa’n\u0131n 19. maddesinin -sekizinci f\u0131kras\u0131yla ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 olarak- dokuzuncu f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
B. Di\u011fer \u0130hlal \u0130ddialar\u0131<\/p>\n
49. Ki\u015fi H\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi sonucuna ula\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan ba\u015fvurucunun aleyhe vek\u00e2let \u00fccretine h\u00fckmedilmesi nedeniyle mahkemeye eri\u015fim hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131yla ilgili olarak bu a\u015famada bir de\u011ferlendirme yap\u0131lmas\u0131na gerek g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
III. G\u0130DER\u0130M <\/p>\n
50. Ba\u015fvurucu, ihlalin tespiti ve 50.000 TL manevi tazminat \u00f6denmesi talebinde bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
51. Anayasa’n\u0131n 19. maddesinin -sekizinci f\u0131kras\u0131yla ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 olarak- dokuzuncu f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine karar verilmi\u015ftir. Bu itibarla ihlalin mahkeme karar\u0131ndan kaynakland\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvuruda tespit edilen hak ihlalinin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmas\u0131nda hukuki yarar bulunmaktad\u0131r. Bu kapsamda karar\u0131n g\u00f6nderildi\u011fi yarg\u0131 mercilerince yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gereken i\u015f, yeniden yarg\u0131lama i\u015flemlerini ba\u015flatmak ve Anayasa Mahkemesini ihlal sonucuna ula\u015ft\u0131ran nedenleri gideren, ihlal karar\u0131nda belirtilen ilkelere uygun yeni bir karar vermektir (Mehmet Do\u011fan [GK], B. No: 2014\/8875, 7\/6\/2018, \u00a7\u00a7 54-60; Alig\u00fcl Alkaya ve di\u011ferleri (2), B. No: 2016\/12506, 7\/11\/2019, \u00a7\u00a7 53-60, 66; Kadri Enis Berbero\u011flu (3) [GK], B. No: 2020\/32949, 21\/1\/2021, \u00a7\u00a7 93-100).<\/p>\n
52. \u0130hlalin 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 gerekti\u011fi sonucuna ula\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
IV. H\u00dcK\u00dcM<\/p>\n
A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle;<\/p>\n
A. Ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n KABUL ED\u0130LEB\u0130L\u0130R OLDU\u011eUNA,<\/p>\n
B. 1. G\u00f6zalt\u0131 s\u00fcresinin makul olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na dayal\u0131 tazminat talebinin reddedilmesi nedeniyle Anayasa’n\u0131n 19. maddesinin -be\u015finci f\u0131kras\u0131yla ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 olarak- dokuzuncu f\u0131kras\u0131nda g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130HLAL ED\u0130LMED\u0130\u011e\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
2. Tutuklama tedbiri sonras\u0131nda tutukluluk incelemesinin duru\u015fmas\u0131z yap\u0131lmas\u0131na dayal\u0131 tazminat talebinin reddedilmesi nedeniyle Anayasa’n\u0131n 19. maddesinin -sekizinci f\u0131kras\u0131yla ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 olarak- dokuzuncu f\u0131kras\u0131nda g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130HLAL ED\u0130LD\u0130\u011e\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
3. Di\u011fer ihlal iddialar\u0131 hakk\u0131nda \u0130NCELEME YAPILMASINA GEREK OLMADI\u011eINA,<\/p>\n
C. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlalinin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmak \u00fczere Burdur A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesine (E.2021\/85 K.2021\/400) G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
D. Ba\u015fvurucunun tazminat talebinin REDD\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
E. 487,60 TL ba\u015fvuru harc\u0131 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 25\/3\/2025 tarihinde OYB\u0130RL\u0130\u011e\u0130YLE karar verildi.<\/p>\n
\u200bAnayasa Mahkemesi’nin 25\/3\/2025 tarihli ve 2021\/58256 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 B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM KARAR M.T. BA\u015eVURUSU (2) (Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2021\/58256) Karar Tarihi: 25\/3\/2025 B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM KARAR Ba\u015fkan : Hasan Tahsin G\u00d6KCAN \u00dcyeler : Recai AKYEL Yusuf \u015eevki HAKYEMEZ \u0130rfan F\u0130DAN Y\u0131lmaz AK\u00c7\u0130L Raport\u00f6r : Ayd\u0131n DEM\u0130REL Ba\u015fvurucu : Vekili : Av. Seranur \u00d6ZMEN I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130 1- Ba\u015fvuru, g\u00f6zalt\u0131 s\u00fcresinin makul olmamas\u0131 ve tutukluluk incelemesinin duru\u015fmas\u0131z yap\u0131lmas\u0131 sebebiyle a\u00e7\u0131lan tazminat davas\u0131n\u0131n reddedilmesi nedeniyle ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir. A. Ba\u015fvurucu Hakk\u0131ndaki Ceza Soru\u015fturmas\u0131 S\u00fcreci 2. Antalya Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan otuz be\u015f ki\u015fiyi a\u015fk\u0131n \u015f\u00fcpheli hakk\u0131nda ByLock kulland\u0131klar\u0131 iddias\u0131yla 2017 y\u0131l\u0131nda ba\u015flat\u0131lan bir soru\u015fturma kapsam\u0131nda 22\/5\/2018 tarihinde g\u00f6zalt\u0131 karar\u0131 verilmi\u015ftir. 3. Avukat olan ba\u015fvurucu, evinde bulunamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u00e7in g\u00f6zalt\u0131na al\u0131namam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bunun \u00fczerine ba\u015fvurucu ve di\u011fer bir \u015f\u00fcpheli hakk\u0131nda Fetullah\u00e7\u0131 Ter\u00f6r \u00d6rg\u00fct\u00fc\/Paralel Devlet Yap\u0131lanmas\u0131na (FET\u00d6\/PDY) \u00fcye olma isnad\u0131na dayal\u0131 olarak yakalama emri verilmesi talep edilmi\u015ftir. Talepte, ba\u015fvurucu ve bir \u015f\u00fcphelinin yakalama an\u0131ndan itibaren 24 saat i\u00e7inde Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k nezdinde haz\u0131r edilmeleri, edilemeyecekse Ses ve G\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fc Bili\u015fim Sistemi (SEGB\u0130S) vas\u0131tas\u0131yla Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k taraf\u0131ndan ifadelerinin al\u0131nmas\u0131 i\u00e7in haz\u0131r edilmeleri, yakaland\u0131klar\u0131 yerde SEGB\u0130S yoksa bu sistemin bulundu\u011fu en yak\u0131n yer Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131na sevk edilmeleri, en ge\u00e7 24 saat i\u00e7inde bu i\u015flemler yap\u0131lam\u0131yorsa ayn\u0131 s\u00fcre i\u00e7inde en yak\u0131n sulh ceza h\u00e2kimi \u00f6n\u00fcne …<\/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-97327","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n