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
\u0130SMET ALTUNTA\u015e BA\u015eVURUSU<\/p>\n
(Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2021\/47519)<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Karar Tarihi: 2\/10\/2024<\/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
Engin YILDIRIM<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
R\u0131dvan G\u00dcLE\u00c7<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Y\u0131ld\u0131z SEFER\u0130NO\u011eLU<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Kenan YA\u015eAR<\/p>\n
Raport\u00f6r<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Mehmet AKTEPE<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fvurucu<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
\u0130smet ALTUNTA\u015e<\/p>\n
Vekili<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Av. Ahmet Emre BAYRAK<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130<\/p>\n
1. Ba\u015fvuru, beyanlar\u0131 mahk\u00fbmiyet karar\u0131nda belirleyici \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde delil olarak kullan\u0131lan tan\u0131klar\u0131n duru\u015fmada ba\u015fvurucu (san\u0131k) taraf\u0131ndan sorgulanamamas\u0131 nedeniyle tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
2. \u015eile Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131; ba\u015fvurucunun Afgan uyruklu on \u00fc\u00e7 ki\u015filik g\u00f6\u00e7men grubunu para kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 Kap\u0131kule s\u0131n\u0131r kap\u0131s\u0131na g\u00f6t\u00fcrece\u011fi vaadiyle ara\u00e7lara bindirerek bir eve g\u00f6t\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc, orada alt\u0131 m\u00fc\u015ftekiyi tehdit ederek para ve e\u015fyas\u0131n\u0131 zorla ald\u0131\u011f\u0131, g\u00f6\u00e7men grubunu evin alt kat\u0131nda bir odaya kilitledi\u011fi \u015f\u00fcphesiyle ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda soru\u015fturma ba\u015flatm\u0131\u015f ve fezleke d\u00fczenleyerek dosyay\u0131 \u0130stanbul Anadolu Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131na (Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k) g\u00f6ndermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
3. Soru\u015fturma neticesinde Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k; ba\u015fvurucunun g\u00f6\u00e7men ka\u00e7ak\u00e7\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131, ki\u015fiyi h\u00fcrriyetinden yoksun k\u0131lma ve ya\u011fma su\u00e7lar\u0131ndan cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 talebiyle 22\/10\/2019 tarihinde iddianame d\u00fczenlemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
4. \u0130ddianamenin kabul\u00fc ile a\u00e7\u0131lan dava, \u0130stanbul Anadolu 11. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesince (Mahkeme) g\u00f6r\u00fclmeye ba\u015flanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Yarg\u0131lamada 13\/11\/2019 tarihinde duru\u015fma haz\u0131rl\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u015flemleri yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Tensip Tutana\u011f\u0131’nda di\u011ferlerinin yan\u0131 s\u0131ra a\u00e7\u0131k adresleri ve kimlik bilgileri bulunmayan Afgan uyruklu ma\u011fdurlar\u0131n soru\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131nda bildirdi\u011fi cep telefonu numaralar\u0131ndan k\u0131sa mesaj ile duru\u015fmaya celplerine karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
5. Duru\u015fma, alt\u0131 celsede bitirilmi\u015ftir. \u0130lk celsede ba\u015fvurucu, savunmas\u0131n\u0131 yapm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ayr\u0131ca Mahkemece \u0130stanbul \u0130l G\u00f6\u00e7 \u0130daresi M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne yaz\u0131 yaz\u0131larak Afganistan uyruklu A.K., \u0130.A.F., M.N., O.N., Z.N. ve Z.F. isimli ma\u011fdurlar\u0131n g\u00f6\u00e7 idaresinde bulunan kay\u0131tlar\u0131n\u0131n ve adreslerinin sorulmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
6. \u0130stanbul \u0130l G\u00f6\u00e7 \u0130daresi M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc, G\u00f6\u00e7Net ve ar\u015fiv sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ekran g\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fclerini m\u00fczekkere cevab\u0131 olarak Mahkemeye g\u00f6ndermi\u015ftir. Bu ekran g\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fclerinde ma\u011fdurlar A.K., \u0130.A.F. ve Z.F.ye ait herhangi bir adres ve telefon bilgisi yer almam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ekran g\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fclerine g\u00f6re; ma\u011fdur M.N.ye ait 531 … 81, 539 … 86 ve 537 … 50 numaral\u0131 telefon bilgilerinin sistemde yer ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve ma\u011fdurun Eski\u015fehir’de ikamet etti\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. O.N. ve Z.N.nin ise 531 … 81, 539 … 86 numaral\u0131 telefon bilgilerinin sistemde yer ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve ma\u011fdurlar\u0131n di\u011fer ma\u011fdur M.N. ile ayn\u0131 adreste ikamet etti\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
7. \u0130kinci celse, \u0130stanbul \u0130l G\u00f6\u00e7 \u0130daresi M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc taraf\u0131ndan ma\u011fdurlar\u0131n Eski\u015fehir’deki adresinin bildirildi\u011fi belirtilerek Eski\u015fehir A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesine talimat yaz\u0131lmas\u0131na ve ma\u011fdurlar\u0131n kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131 bildirilen 539 … 86 numaral\u0131 cep telefonu hatt\u0131na duru\u015fma g\u00fcn\u00fcn\u00fcn k\u0131sa mesaj yoluyla bildirilmesine Mahkemece karar verilmi\u015ftir. \u00dc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc celse COVID-19 salg\u0131n\u0131 nedeniyle ertelenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
8. D\u00f6rd\u00fcnc\u00fc celsede; ma\u011fdurlar i\u00e7in Eski\u015fehir A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesine yaz\u0131lan istinabe talebinin, ma\u011fdurlar ad\u0131na \u00e7\u0131kart\u0131lan \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131 ka\u011f\u0131tlar\u0131n\u0131n adreste tan\u0131nmad\u0131klar\u0131ndan bahisle yerine getirilmeksizin iade edilmesi nedeniyle Mahkeme, yabanc\u0131 uyruklu olup a\u00e7\u0131k kimlik ve adres bilgileri bulunmayan ma\u011fdurlar\u0131n temininin imk\u00e2ns\u0131z oldu\u011funu vurgulayarak dinlenmeleri y\u00f6n\u00fcndeki ara karardan vazge\u00e7mi\u015f ve soru\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131nda al\u0131nm\u0131\u015f ifadelerinin okunulmas\u0131 ile yetinilmesine karar vermi\u015ftir. Bu celsede ma\u011fdurlar\u0131n soru\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131nda al\u0131nm\u0131\u015f beyanlar\u0131, ba\u015fvurucuya ve m\u00fcdafiine okunarak diyecekleri sorulmu\u015ftur. Ayn\u0131 celsede iddia makam\u0131 esas hakk\u0131nda m\u00fctalaa sunmu\u015ftur. Mahkeme, ba\u015fvurucu ve m\u00fcdafiinin esas hakk\u0131nda m\u00fctalaaya kar\u015f\u0131 savunma haz\u0131rlamak i\u00e7in talep ettikleri s\u00fcrenin verilmesine, duru\u015fman\u0131n ertelenmesine karar vermi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu m\u00fcdafiinin mazeret dilek\u00e7esi vermesi ve mazeretin Mahkemece kabul edilmesi nedeniyle duru\u015fman\u0131n 27\/10\/2020 tarihine ertelenmesine karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
9. Mahkeme 27\/10\/2020 tarihli son celsede ba\u015fvurucunun ma\u011fdurlar A.K., \u0130.A.F., M.N. ve O.N.ye y\u00f6nelik ya\u011fma su\u00e7lar\u0131ndan ayr\u0131 ayr\u0131 9 y\u0131l 2 ay hapis cezas\u0131, ma\u011fdurlar Z.N. ve Z.F.ye y\u00f6nelik ya\u011fma su\u00e7lar\u0131ndan ayr\u0131 ayr\u0131 4 y\u0131l 7 ay hapis cezas\u0131, ki\u015fiyi h\u00fcrriyeti yoksun k\u0131lma su\u00e7undan 6 y\u0131l 3 ay hapis cezas\u0131, g\u00f6\u00e7men ka\u00e7ak\u00e7\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 su\u00e7undan ise 3 y\u0131l 4 ay hapis cezas\u0131 ve 3.320 TL adli para cezas\u0131yla cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir. Gerek\u00e7eli karar\u0131n ilgili k\u0131sm\u0131 \u015f\u00f6yledir:<\/p>\n
“Su\u00e7 tarihinde san\u0131k \u0130smet Altunta\u015f’\u0131n [ba\u015fvurucu], aralar\u0131nda ma\u011fdurlar\u0131n da bulundu\u011fu Afgan uyruklu 13 ki\u015filik grubu Kap\u0131kule s\u0131n\u0131r kap\u0131s\u0131na g\u00f6t\u00fcr\u00fcp buradan yasad\u0131\u015f\u0131 yollarla yurtd\u0131\u015f\u0131na \u00e7\u0131karma vaadiyle 2.700 USD kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131nda anla\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131, san\u0131k [M.\u00c7.yi] arayarak arac\u0131yla Zeytinburnu’na gelmesini istedi\u011fi, san\u0131k[M.\u00c7.nin] de 34 […] 3670 plakal\u0131 ara\u00e7 ile \u0130smet Altunta\u015f’\u0131n bulundu\u011fu yere geldi\u011fi, bu s\u0131rada san\u0131k [S.\u00c7.yi] arayarak \u015eile’ye gidecek yolcular\u0131n oldu\u011funu s\u00f6yleyerek yan\u0131na \u00e7a\u011f\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131, san\u0131k [S.\u00c7.nin] de 34 […] 34 plakal\u0131 ticari taksi ile yanlar\u0131na geldi\u011fi, ma\u011fdurlar\u0131n bir k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131n 34[ …] 34 plakal\u0131 ticari taksiye bir k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131n da 34 […] 3670 plakal\u0131 araca bindirildi\u011fi, akabinde \u015eile il\u00e7esi \u0130mrendere Mahallesinde bulunan san\u0131k [M.A.n\u0131n] evine getirildikleri, san\u0131klar [S.\u00c7.] ile [M.\u00c7.nin] ma\u011fdurlar\u0131 ara\u00e7lardan indirdikten hemen sonra olay yerinden ayr\u0131ld\u0131klar\u0131, ma\u011fdurlar\u0131n eve girmesinden sonra san\u0131k \u0130smet Altunta\u015f’\u0131n ‘susun yoksa can\u0131n\u0131z\u0131 yakar\u0131m’ \u015feklinde tehdit etmek suretiyle, ma\u011fdurlardan [A.K.nin] 255 TL ile 20 Euro paras\u0131 ve cep telefonunu, [Z.F.nin] 125 TL paras\u0131n\u0131, [\u0130.A.F.nin] tablet bilgisayar\u0131 ile cep telefonunu, [Z.N.nin] i\u00e7erisinde \u00f6zel e\u015fyalar\u0131n\u0131n bulundu\u011fu \u00e7antas\u0131n\u0131, [O.N.nin] 70 TL paras\u0131 ve cep telefonunu, [M.N.nin] i\u00e7erisinde \u00f6zel e\u015fyalar\u0131n\u0131n bulundu\u011fu \u00e7antas\u0131n\u0131 ve cep telefonunu zor kullanarak ald\u0131\u011f\u0131, ma\u011fdurlar [A.K.], [Z.F.] ve [O.N.nin] ellerini plastik kelep\u00e7e ile ba\u011flad\u0131\u011f\u0131, san\u0131k [M.A.n\u0131n] da t\u00fcfek ile ma\u011fdurlar\u0131n ba\u015f\u0131nda bekledi\u011fi, bir s\u00fcre sonra ma\u011fdurlar\u0131 odaya kilitledikleri, ma\u011fdur [A.K.nin] evden ka\u00e7arak jandarmaya haber vermesi \u00fczerine san\u0131klar\u0131n su\u00e7\u00fcst\u00fc yakaland\u0131klar\u0131, …”<\/p>\n
10. Ba\u015fvurucu, an\u0131lan h\u00fckme kar\u015f\u0131 istinaf kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurmu\u015ftur. \u0130stinaf dilek\u00e7esinde di\u011fer istinaf nedenlerinin yan\u0131 s\u0131ra, tan\u0131klar\u0131n (ma\u011fdurlar\u0131n) hi\u00e7birinin Mahkeme huzurunda dinlenmedi\u011fini belirterek karar\u0131n bozulmas\u0131n\u0131 talep etmi\u015ftir. \u0130stanbul B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 29. Ceza Dairesi (Daire) 24\/3\/2021 tarihli karar\u0131yla ma\u011fdur Z.F.ye y\u00f6nelik ya\u011fma su\u00e7u y\u00f6n\u00fcnden istinaf talebinin esastan reddine kesin olarak, ma\u011fdurlar A.K, \u0130.A.F.,, M.N., O.N., ve Z.N.ye y\u00f6nelik ya\u011fma ve ki\u015fiyi h\u00fcrriyetten yoksun b\u0131rakma su\u00e7lar\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden ise istinaf talebin reddine temyiz yolu a\u00e7\u0131k olmak \u00fczere karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
11. Ba\u015fvurucu, istinaf kanun yolunda ileri s\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc itirazlar\u0131 tekrar ederek Daire karar\u0131n\u0131 temyiz etmi\u015ftir. Yarg\u0131tay 6. Ceza Dairesi 28\/9\/2021 tarihinde ba\u015fvurucunun g\u00f6\u00e7men ka\u00e7ak\u00e7\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve ma\u011fdur Z.F.ye y\u00f6nelik nitelikli ya\u011fma su\u00e7u y\u00f6n\u00fcnden yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 temyiz itiraz\u0131n\u0131n temyizi m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan reddine, ki\u015fiyi h\u00fcrriyetinden yoksun k\u0131lma ve nitelikli ya\u011fma su\u00e7lar\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden ise temyiz itirazlar\u0131n\u0131n esastan reddiyle h\u00fck\u00fcmlerin onanmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
12. Ba\u015fvurucu nihai karar\u0131 10\/10\/2021 tarihinde \u00f6\u011frenmi\u015f, 15\/10\/2021 tarihinde bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
13. Komisyon; ma\u011fdur Z.F.ye y\u00f6nelik nitelikli ya\u011fma su\u00e7u hari\u00e7 nitelikli ya\u011fma su\u00e7lar\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki \u015fik\u00e2yetlerin kabul edilemez oldu\u011funa, an\u0131lan hakka ili\u015fkin \u015fik\u00e2yetlerin kabul edilebilirlik incelemesinin B\u00f6l\u00fcm taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
II. DE\u011eERLEND\u0130RME<\/p>\n
14. Ba\u015fvurucu, beyanlar\u0131 mahk\u0217miyet h\u00fckm\u00fcne esas al\u0131nan tan\u0131klar\u0131n duru\u015fmada dinlenmemeleri nedeniyle tan\u0131klara soru sorma imk\u00e2n\u0131 elde edemedi\u011fini belirterek tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
15. Ba\u015fvurucu; mahk\u00fbmiyet karar\u0131nda beyan\u0131na yer verilen tan\u0131klar\u0131n huzurda dinlenilmesi i\u00e7in Mahkemenin herhangi bir giri\u015fimde bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, kendisine tan\u0131klara soru sorma imk\u00e2n\u0131 tan\u0131nmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, bu suretle adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
16. Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 (Bakanl\u0131k) g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnde; ba\u015fvurunun \u00f6ncelikle kabul edilebilirlik kriterleri y\u00f6n\u00fcnden de\u011ferlendirilmesi gerekti\u011fi belirtilmi\u015f, ayr\u0131ca somut olay ele al\u0131n\u0131rken mevzuat h\u00fck\u00fcmleri ile konuya ili\u015fkin yer verilen Anayasa Mahkemesi kararlar\u0131n\u0131n dikkate al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi vurgulanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucu, Bakanl\u0131k g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne kar\u015f\u0131 beyanda bulunmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
17. Ba\u015fvurucunun iddialar\u0131 adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden incelenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
18. A\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a dayanaktan yoksun olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve kabul edilemezli\u011fine karar verilmesini gerektirecek ba\u015fka bir neden de bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lan ba\u015fvurunun kabul edilebilir oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
19. Anayasa Mahkemesi, bir\u00e7ok karar\u0131nda tan\u0131k kavram\u0131n\u0131 san\u0131\u011fa isnat edilen fiil hakk\u0131nda bilgi veren herhangi bir ki\u015fi \u015feklinde \u00f6zerk olarak yorumlam\u0131\u015f ve tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131 ile ilgili ilkeleri belirlemi\u015ftir (Atila O\u011fuz Boyal\u0131, B. No: 2013\/99, 20\/3\/2014; Sel\u00e7uk Demir, B. No: 2014\/9783, 22\/1\/2015; AZ. M., B. No: 2013\/560, 16\/4\/2015; Baran Karada\u011f, B. No: 2014\/12906, 7\/5\/2015; Orhan G\u00fclery\u00fcz, B. No: 2019\/30221, 28\/12\/2021). Buna g\u00f6re bir ceza yarg\u0131lamas\u0131nda san\u0131\u011f\u0131n aleyhine olan tan\u0131klar\u0131 sorgulama ve sorgulatma hakk\u0131 vard\u0131r. Hakk\u0131nda ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilen ceza yarg\u0131lamas\u0131 s\u00fcrecinde san\u0131\u011f\u0131n tan\u0131klara soru y\u00f6neltebilmesi, onlarla y\u00fczle\u015febilmesi ve tan\u0131klar\u0131n beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n do\u011frulu\u011funu s\u0131nama imk\u00e2n\u0131na sahip olmas\u0131 adil bir yarg\u0131laman\u0131n yap\u0131labilmesi bak\u0131m\u0131ndan gereklidir (AZ. M., \u00a7 55). Di\u011fer yandan bir mahk\u00fbmiyet -tek veya belirleyici \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde- san\u0131\u011f\u0131n soru\u015fturma veya yarg\u0131lama a\u015famas\u0131nda sorgulama ve sorgulatma imk\u00e2n\u0131 bulamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 bir kimse taraf\u0131ndan verilen ifadelere dayand\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ve dengeleyici g\u00fcvenceler sa\u011flayan bir usul \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015fse san\u0131\u011f\u0131n haklar\u0131 Anayasa’n\u0131n 36. maddesindeki g\u00fcvencelerle ba\u011fda\u015fmayacak \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde k\u0131s\u0131tlanm\u0131\u015f olur (Orhan G\u00fclery\u00fcz, \u00a7 35).<\/p>\n
20. Anayasa Mahkemesi, tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131yla ilgili olarak verdi\u011fi kararlar\u0131nda somut bir yarg\u0131lama \u00f6ncesinde veya haricinde elde edilen tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n delil olarak kabul\u00fcn\u00fcn yarg\u0131laman\u0131n adilli\u011fine zarar verip vermedi\u011fini de\u011ferlendirmek i\u00e7in \u00fc\u00e7 a\u015famal\u0131 bir test uygulanmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fini ifade etmektedir. Buna g\u00f6re ilk olarak tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n mahkemede haz\u0131r edilmemesi ge\u00e7erli bir nedenin mevcudiyetine dayanmal\u0131d\u0131r. \u0130kinci olarak san\u0131\u011f\u0131n sorgulama veya sorgulatma imk\u00e2n\u0131 bulamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 tan\u0131k taraf\u0131ndan verilen beyan\u0131n mahk\u00fbmiyetin dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131 tek veya belirleyici delil olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n de\u011ferlendirilmesi gerekir. Sorgulama ve sorgulatma imk\u00e2n\u0131 tan\u0131nmayan tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n beyan\u0131n\u0131n tek veya belirleyici delil oldu\u011funun tespit edilmesi durumunda ise \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc a\u015fama olarak savunma taraf\u0131n\u0131n maruz kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 bu olumsuzlu\u011fun telafi edilmesi amac\u0131yla yeterli d\u00fczeyde kar\u015f\u0131 dengeleyici g\u00fcvenceler sa\u011flayan bir usul\u00fcn y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fcl\u00fcp y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclmedi\u011fi ortaya konulmal\u0131d\u0131r (baz\u0131 de\u011fi\u015fikliklerle birlikte bkz. Abdurrahim Balur, B. No: 2013\/5467, 7\/1\/2016, \u00a7 80; Onur Urbay, B. No: 2014\/6222, 6\/3\/2019, \u00a7\u00a7 36, 40; Zekeriya Sevim, B. No: 2018\/18989, 16\/6\/2021, \u00a7\u00a7 44, 51). Bu kapsamda, h\u00fckme ula\u015f\u0131l\u0131rken sorgulanmam\u0131\u015f tan\u0131k beyan\u0131n\u0131 destekleyen ba\u015fka do\u011frulay\u0131c\u0131 delillere dayan\u0131lmas\u0131 telafi edici g\u00fcvencelerden biri olarak kabul edilebilir (Orhan G\u00fclery\u00fcz, \u00a7 39). Sorgulanmayan tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n beyan\u0131n\u0131n g\u00fcvenilirli\u011finin ve do\u011frulu\u011funun saptanmas\u0131 amac\u0131yla savunma taraf\u0131na sa\u011flanabilecek bir di\u011fer telafi edici g\u00fcvence ise san\u0131\u011fa olay\u0131n kendi versiyonunu anlatma ve delillerini sunma imk\u00e2n\u0131n\u0131n tan\u0131nmas\u0131d\u0131r (Orhan G\u00fclery\u00fcz, \u00a7 40).<\/p>\n
21. Ba\u015fvuru konusu olayda incelenmesi gereken ilk sorun, beyan\u0131 delil olarak kabul edilen tan\u0131klar\u0131n duru\u015fmada dinlenmemesinin ge\u00e7erli bir nedene dayan\u0131p dayanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131d\u0131r. Mahkeme, Afgan uyruklu alt\u0131 ma\u011fdurun tan\u0131k olarak dinlenebilmeleri i\u00e7in \u0130stanbul \u0130l G\u00f6\u00e7 \u0130daresine m\u00fczekkere yazm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu m\u00fczekkereye verilen cevaptan anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00fczere yaln\u0131zca ma\u011fdurlar M.N., O.N. ve Z.N. Eski\u015fehir’de bir adreste ikamet etmektedir. Di\u011fer ma\u011fdurlar\u0131n bu adreste ikamet ettiklerine ili\u015fkin herhangi bir kay\u0131t dosyada yer almam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ayr\u0131ca ma\u011fdurlara ili\u015fkin \u00fc\u00e7 ayr\u0131 telefon numaras\u0131 bildirilmesine ra\u011fmen aralar\u0131ndan yaln\u0131zca bir tanesine k\u0131sa mesaj g\u00f6nderilerek duru\u015fma g\u00fcn ve saati bildirilmi\u015ftir. Mahkeme, ma\u011fdurlar\u0131n yurt i\u00e7inde olup olmad\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n tespiti ve yurt i\u00e7inde iseler mevcut adreslerinin tespiti i\u00e7in ba\u015fkaca bir giri\u015fimde de bulunmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. \u0130l G\u00f6\u00e7 \u0130daresinin ekran g\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fcs\u00fcnden ibaret a\u00e7\u0131k olmayan cevab\u0131na dayan\u0131larak temininin imk\u00e2ns\u0131z oldu\u011fu tespitiyle ma\u011fdurlar\u0131n dinlenilmesinden vazge\u00e7ilmi\u015ftir. Bu noktada Mahkemece ma\u011fdurlar\u0131n tan\u0131k olarak duru\u015fmada dinlenilebilmeleri i\u00e7in yeterli bir \u00e7aba g\u00f6sterilmedi\u011fi a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r. Ancak bu durum, tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011finin kabul edilmesi i\u00e7in yeterli de\u011fildir. \u0130kinci olarak h\u00fckm\u00fcn tek ba\u015f\u0131na veya belirleyici \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde ba\u015fvurucunun sorgulama veya sorgulatma imk\u00e2n\u0131na sahip olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 bir tan\u0131k\/tan\u0131klar taraf\u0131ndan verilen ifadeye dayal\u0131 olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ortaya \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
22. Somut olayda Mahkeme, ma\u011fdur Z.F.ye y\u00f6nelik ya\u011fma su\u00e7u d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki di\u011fer ya\u011fma su\u00e7lar\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden ma\u011fdurlar\u0131n soru\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131nda kollukta verdikleri ifadelere dayanarak mahk\u00fbmiyet h\u00fckm\u00fc kurmu\u015ftur. Ancak ya\u011fma su\u00e7una konu ba\u015fvurucu taraf\u0131ndan zorla al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 belirtilen hatta baz\u0131 ma\u011fdurlar y\u00f6n\u00fcnden Mahkemece de\u011fer azl\u0131\u011f\u0131 nedeniyle indirim yap\u0131lan para ve e\u015fyay\u0131 olay yerinde ya da ba\u015fvurucuda ele ge\u00e7irilip ge\u00e7irilmedi\u011fine, ma\u011fdurlara teslim edilip edilmedi\u011fine ili\u015fkin herhangi bir tespit gerek\u00e7eli kararda yer almam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucunun her a\u015famada ya\u011fma eylemini reddetti\u011fi olayda Mahkeme, duru\u015fmada dinlenmeyen tan\u0131klar\u0131n beyanlar\u0131na dayanarak mahk\u00fbmiyet h\u00fckm\u00fc kurmu\u015ftur. Bu noktada tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n ya\u011fma su\u00e7u y\u00f6n\u00fcnden mahk\u00fbmiyet karar\u0131na g\u00f6t\u00fcren tek delil oldu\u011funun kabul edilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
23. Yarg\u0131lama s\u0131ras\u0131nda ba\u015fvurucunun olay\u0131 kendi bak\u0131\u015f a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131na g\u00f6re anlatma, Mahkemeye a\u00e7\u0131klama, iddia ve delillerini sunma ve tan\u0131k (ma\u011fdur) beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n g\u00fcvenilirli\u011fine ve do\u011frulu\u011funa \u015f\u00fcphe d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcrme imk\u00e2n\u0131 buldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ancak tan\u0131klar\u0131n ba\u015fvurucunun da onlara soru sormas\u0131na imk\u00e2n sa\u011flayacak \u015fekilde dinlenmemesi nedeniyle ba\u015fvurucu tan\u0131klar\u0131 sorgulayamam\u0131\u015f; sorulan sorulara verdikleri cevaplar hakk\u0131nda ki\u015fisel izlenim edinme f\u0131rsat\u0131 elde edememi\u015ftir. Bu y\u00fczden tan\u0131klar\u0131n g\u00f6sterdi\u011fi reaksiyonlar konusunda Mahkemenin dikkati \u00e7ekilememi\u015f, tan\u0131klar\u0131n beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n g\u00fcvenilirli\u011fi test edilememi\u015ftir. Mahkeme de tan\u0131klar beyanda bulunurken g\u00f6sterdikleri reaksiyonlarla ilgili olarak izlenim edinememi\u015ftir. Sonu\u00e7 olarak g\u00fcvenilirli\u011fi ve do\u011frulu\u011fu test edilmemi\u015f tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131 tek ba\u015f\u0131na h\u00fckme esas al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 h\u00e2lde savunman\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131la\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 zorluklar\u0131 telafi edecek kar\u015f\u0131 dengeleyici g\u00fcvencelerin sa\u011flanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu ba\u011flamda tan\u0131klar\u0131n duru\u015fmada veya Ses ve G\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fc Bili\u015fim Sistemi (SEGB\u0130S) yoluyla dinlenmemesinin bir b\u00fct\u00fcn olarak yarg\u0131laman\u0131n hakkaniyetini zedeledi\u011fi sonucuna ula\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
24. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle Anayasa’n\u0131n 36. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
Y\u0131ld\u0131z SEFER\u0130NO\u011eLU bu g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fe kat\u0131lmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
III. G\u0130DER\u0130M<\/p>\n
25. Ba\u015fvurucu ihlalin tespiti, yarg\u0131laman\u0131n yenilenmesi ile manevi tazminat talebinde bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
26. 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 mahkemece 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 (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
27. Bu konuda \u00f6nemle belirtilmelidir ki su\u00e7lu\/su\u00e7suz karar\u0131 vermek ya da daha hafif veya a\u011f\u0131r ceza belirlemek de Anayasa Mahkemesinin g\u00f6revi de\u011fildir (baz\u0131 de\u011fi\u015fikliklerle birlikte bkz. Ruh\u015fen Mahmuto\u011flu, B. No: 2015\/22, 15\/1\/2020, \u00a7 67). Belirli bir davaya ili\u015fkin olarak delilleri de\u011ferlendirme ve g\u00f6sterilen delilin davayla ilgili olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na karar verme yetkisi kural olarak yarg\u0131lamay\u0131 y\u00fcr\u00fcten mahkemelere aittir (Orhan K\u0131l\u0131\u00e7 [GK], B. No: 2014\/4704, 1\/2\/2018, \u00a7 44). Bu ba\u011flamda somut olayda Anayasa Mahkemesince verilen ihlal karar\u0131 ba\u015fvurucunun ya\u011fma su\u00e7unu i\u015fleyip i\u015flemedi\u011fi y\u00f6n\u00fcnde bir tespit i\u00e7ermemi\u015ftir. \u0130hlal karar\u0131, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n beraat etti\u011fi anlam\u0131na gelmedi\u011fi gibi ihlal karar\u0131n\u0131n gereklerinin yerine getirilmesi amac\u0131yla yap\u0131lacak yeniden yarg\u0131lama neticesinde san\u0131k hakk\u0131nda mutlaka beraat karar\u0131 verilmesi gerekti\u011fi anlam\u0131na da gelmemi\u015ftir. \u0130hlalin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 gidermek \u00fczere gereken i\u015flemler yerine getirildikten sonra yap\u0131lacak de\u011ferlendirmede, delillerin takdir bi\u00e7imine g\u00f6re mahkemenin benzer veya farkl\u0131 bir sonuca varmas\u0131 m\u00fcmk\u00fcnd\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
28. Tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131 tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n yarg\u0131lama evrelerindeki beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n delil de\u011feriyle ilgili bir derecelendirme yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na almamaktad\u0131r. Di\u011fer bir ifadeyle bu hak, tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n duru\u015fmadaki beyanlar\u0131na \u00fcst\u00fcnl\u00fck tan\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi y\u00f6n\u00fcnde bir g\u00fcvence de i\u00e7ermemektedir. Savunmaya duru\u015fmada tan\u0131\u011f\u0131 sorgulama f\u0131rsat\u0131 tan\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve san\u0131\u011f\u0131n di\u011fer anayasal haklar\u0131na sayg\u0131 g\u00f6sterildi\u011fi s\u00fcrece tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n a\u015famalardaki beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n hangisine itibar edilece\u011fi meselesi karar veren mahkemenin takdirindedir (baz\u0131 de\u011fi\u015fikliklerle birlikte bkz. Musa Y\u0131lmaz Acar, B. No: 2013\/1664, 16\/7\/2014, \u00a7 53). Mahkeme, \u015f\u00fcphelinin\/san\u0131\u011f\u0131n anayasal haklar\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6zetmek ve gerek\u00e7esini ortaya koymak \u015fart\u0131yla tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n soru\u015fturma evresinde elde edilen ifadesine de \u00fcst\u00fcnl\u00fck tan\u0131yabilir.<\/p>\n
29. \u00d6te yandan ihlalin niteli\u011fine g\u00f6re yeniden yarg\u0131laman\u0131n yeterli bir giderim sa\u011flayaca\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan manevi tazminat talebinin reddine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
IV. H\u00dcK\u00dcM<\/p>\n
A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle;<\/p>\n
A. Tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n KABUL ED\u0130LEB\u0130L\u0130R OLDU\u011eUNA OYB\u0130RL\u0130\u011e\u0130YLE,<\/p>\n
B. Anayasa’n\u0131n 36. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130HLAL ED\u0130LD\u0130\u011e\u0130NE Y\u0131ld\u0131z SEFER\u0130NO\u011eLU’nun kar\u015f\u0131oyu ve OY\u00c7OKLU\u011eUYLA,<\/p>\n
C. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlalinin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmak \u00fczere \u0130stanbul Anadolu 11. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesine (E.2019\/518, K.2020\/339) G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
D. Ba\u015fvurucunun manevi tazminat talebinin REDD\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
E. 487,60 TL har\u00e7 ve 18.800 TL vek\u00e2let \u00fccretinden olu\u015fan toplam 19.287,60 TL yarg\u0131lama giderinin ba\u015fvurucuya \u00d6DENMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
F. \u00d6demenin karar\u0131n tebli\u011fini takiben ba\u015fvurucunun Hazine ve Maliye Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na ba\u015fvuru tarihinden itibaren d\u00f6rt ay i\u00e7inde yap\u0131lmas\u0131na, \u00f6demede gecikme olmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde bu s\u00fcrenin sona erdi\u011fi tarihten \u00f6deme tarihine kadar ge\u00e7en s\u00fcre i\u00e7in yasal FA\u0130Z UYGULANMASINA,<\/p>\n
G. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE 2\/10\/2024 tarihinde karar verildi.<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
KAR\u015eIOY<\/p>\n
1. \u00c7o\u011funlu\u011fun “Tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131 tek ba\u015f\u0131na h\u00fckme esas al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 h\u00e2lde savunman\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131la\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 zorluklar\u0131 telafi edecek kar\u015f\u0131 dengeleyici g\u00fcvencelerin sa\u011flanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, bu ba\u011flamda tan\u0131klar\u0131n duru\u015fmada veya SEGB\u0130S yoluyla dinlenmemesinin bir b\u00fct\u00fcn olarak yarg\u0131laman\u0131n hakkaniyetini zedeledi\u011fi sonucuna ula\u015f\u0131larak, Anayasa’n\u0131n 36. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine” dair karar\u0131na i\u015ftirak etmemekteyim. \u015e\u00f6yle ki;<\/p>\n
2. Ba\u015fvurucunun Afgan uyruklu on \u00fc\u00e7 ki\u015filik g\u00f6\u00e7men grubunu para kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 Kap\u0131kule s\u0131n\u0131r kap\u0131s\u0131na g\u00f6t\u00fcrece\u011fi vaadiyle ara\u00e7lara bindirerek bir eve g\u00f6t\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc, orada alt\u0131 m\u00fc\u015ftekiyi tehdit ederek para ve e\u015fyalar\u0131n\u0131 zorla ald\u0131\u011f\u0131, g\u00f6\u00e7men grubunu evin alt kat\u0131nda bir odaya kilitledi\u011fi \u015f\u00fcphesiyle Ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda soru\u015fturma ba\u015flat\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
3. Sonras\u0131nda iddianamenin kabul\u00fc ile Ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda, g\u00f6\u00e7men ka\u00e7ak\u00e7\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131, ki\u015fiyi h\u00fcrriyetinden yoksun k\u0131lma ve ya\u011fma su\u00e7lar\u0131ndan yarg\u0131lama ba\u015flam\u0131\u015f olup; yarg\u0131lama alt\u0131 celsede tamamlanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
4. Yarg\u0131lama sonucunda Mahkeme ya\u011fma, ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyetini yoksun k\u0131lma ve g\u00f6\u00e7men ka\u00e7ak\u00e7\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 su\u00e7lar\u0131ndan ayr\u0131 ayr\u0131 cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir. S\u00f6z konusu karar istinaf ve temyiz yollar\u0131ndan ge\u00e7erek kesinle\u015fmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
5. Yarg\u0131laman\u0131n d\u00f6rd\u00fcnc\u00fc celsesinde; ma\u011fdur\/tan\u0131klar i\u00e7in yaz\u0131lan talimat\u0131n yerine getirilmeksizin iade edilmesi nedeniyle Mahkeme, yabanc\u0131 uyruklu olup a\u00e7\u0131k kimlik ve adres bilgileri bulunmayan ma\u011fdurlar\u0131n temininin imkans\u0131z olmas\u0131 nedeniyle, dinlenmeleri y\u00f6n\u00fcndeki ara karardan vazge\u00e7mi\u015f ve soru\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131nda al\u0131nm\u0131\u015f beyanlar\u0131 ba\u015fvurucuya ve m\u00fcdafiine okunarak diyecekleri sorulmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
6. Ba\u015fvurucu veya m\u00fcdafii, okunan ma\u011fdur\/tan\u0131k anlat\u0131mlar\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda yarg\u0131lamay\u0131 yapan mahkeme huzurunda tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131n\u0131 kullanma y\u00f6n\u00fcnde bir talepte bulunmam\u0131\u015flard\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucunun yarg\u0131lama s\u0131ras\u0131nda bu y\u00f6nde bir taleplerinin bulundu\u011funu iddia bile etmemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
7. Gerek A\u0130HM, gerekse AYM bir\u00e7ok karar\u0131nda adil yarg\u0131lanma g\u00fcvencelerinden a\u00e7\u0131k bir \u015fekilde feragat edilebilece\u011fi gibi \u00f6rt\u00fcl\u00fc \u015fekilde feragat edilmesinin de m\u00fcmk\u00fcn oldu\u011funa i\u015faret etmi\u015flerdir. Yarg\u0131lama s\u0131ras\u0131nda, istinabe yoluyla dinlenen tan\u0131klar\u0131n huzurda da beyan vermelerini ve tan\u0131klar\u0131 sorgulama hakk\u0131n\u0131 kullanmay\u0131 istememesinin Ba\u015fvurucunun tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131ndan feragat etti\u011fi anlam\u0131na da gelmesi s\u00f6z konusu olabilecektir.<\/p>\n
8. A\u00e7\u0131klanan bu gerek\u00e7elerle \u00e7o\u011funlu\u011fun g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne i\u015ftirak etmemekteyim.<\/p>\n
\u00dcye<\/p>\n
\u00a0Y\u0131ld\u0131z SEFER\u0130NO\u011eLU<\/p>\n
\u200bAnayasa Mahkemesi’nin 2\/10\/2024 tarihli ve 2021\/47519 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 \u0130SMET ALTUNTA\u015e BA\u015eVURUSU (Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2021\/47519) \u00a0 Karar Tarihi: 2\/10\/2024 \u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM \u00a0 KARAR \u00a0 \u00a0 Ba\u015fkan : Basri BA\u011eCI \u00dcyeler : Engin YILDIRIM \u00a0 \u00a0 R\u0131dvan G\u00dcLE\u00c7 \u00a0 \u00a0 Y\u0131ld\u0131z SEFER\u0130NO\u011eLU \u00a0 \u00a0 Kenan YA\u015eAR Raport\u00f6r : Mehmet AKTEPE Ba\u015fvurucu : \u0130smet ALTUNTA\u015e Vekili : Av. Ahmet Emre BAYRAK \u00a0 I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130 1. Ba\u015fvuru, beyanlar\u0131 mahk\u00fbmiyet karar\u0131nda belirleyici \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde delil olarak kullan\u0131lan tan\u0131klar\u0131n duru\u015fmada ba\u015fvurucu (san\u0131k) taraf\u0131ndan sorgulanamamas\u0131 nedeniyle tan\u0131k sorgulama hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir. 2. \u015eile Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131; ba\u015fvurucunun Afgan uyruklu on \u00fc\u00e7 ki\u015filik g\u00f6\u00e7men grubunu para kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 Kap\u0131kule s\u0131n\u0131r kap\u0131s\u0131na g\u00f6t\u00fcrece\u011fi vaadiyle ara\u00e7lara bindirerek bir eve g\u00f6t\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc, orada alt\u0131 m\u00fc\u015ftekiyi tehdit ederek para ve e\u015fyas\u0131n\u0131 zorla ald\u0131\u011f\u0131, g\u00f6\u00e7men grubunu evin alt kat\u0131nda bir odaya kilitledi\u011fi \u015f\u00fcphesiyle ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda soru\u015fturma ba\u015flatm\u0131\u015f ve fezleke d\u00fczenleyerek dosyay\u0131 \u0130stanbul Anadolu Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131na (Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k) g\u00f6ndermi\u015ftir. 3. Soru\u015fturma neticesinde Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k; ba\u015fvurucunun g\u00f6\u00e7men ka\u00e7ak\u00e7\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131, ki\u015fiyi h\u00fcrriyetinden yoksun k\u0131lma ve ya\u011fma su\u00e7lar\u0131ndan cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 talebiyle 22\/10\/2019 tarihinde iddianame d\u00fczenlemi\u015ftir. 4. \u0130ddianamenin kabul\u00fc ile a\u00e7\u0131lan dava, \u0130stanbul Anadolu 11. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesince (Mahkeme) g\u00f6r\u00fclmeye ba\u015flanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Yarg\u0131lamada 13\/11\/2019 tarihinde duru\u015fma haz\u0131rl\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u015flemleri yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Tensip Tutana\u011f\u0131’nda di\u011ferlerinin yan\u0131 s\u0131ra a\u00e7\u0131k adresleri ve kimlik bilgileri bulunmayan Afgan …<\/p>","protected":false},"author":0,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[27,535],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-21009","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber","category-uncategorized-tr"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n