T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CUMHUR\u0130YET\u0130<\/p>\n
ANAYASA MAHKEMES\u0130<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
KARAR<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00d6. \u00d6. BA\u015eVURUSU<\/p>\n
(Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2021\/17601)<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Karar Tarihi: 10\/12\/2024<\/p>\n
B\u0130R\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
Hasan Tahsin G\u00d6KCAN<\/p>\n
\u00dcyeler<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Recai AKYEL<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Selahaddin MENTE\u015e<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Muhterem \u0130NCE<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Y\u0131lmaz AK\u00c7\u0130L<\/p>\n
Raport\u00f6r<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Ay\u015fenur TUNCER<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fvurucu<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Vekili<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Av. Burak Kaan KO\u00c7AK<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130<\/p>\n
1. Ba\u015fvuru, m\u00fc\u015fterek \u00e7ocu\u011fun velayetinin de\u011fi\u015ftirilmemesi nedeniyle aile hayat\u0131na sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
2. Ba\u015fvurucunun B.Y. ile yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 evlilikten 2008 y\u0131l\u0131nda bir erkek \u00e7ocu\u011fu d\u00fcnyaya gelmi\u015ftir. Taraflar aras\u0131nda g\u00f6r\u00fclen anla\u015fmal\u0131 bo\u015fanma davas\u0131nda taraflar\u0131n bo\u015fanmalar\u0131na, m\u00fc\u015fterek \u00e7ocu\u011fun velayetinin annesine verilmesine, velayeti anneye verilen \u00e7ocuk ile baba aras\u0131nda ki\u015fisel ili\u015fki kurulmas\u0131na ve \u00e7ocuk lehine i\u015ftirak nafakas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir. An\u0131lan karar 27\/9\/2013 tarihinde kesinle\u015fmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
3. Velayet sahibi anne 25\/5\/2018 tarihinde ki\u015fisel ili\u015fkinin de\u011fi\u015ftirilmesi davas\u0131 a\u00e7m\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Dava dilek\u00e7esinde ba\u015fvurucunun m\u00fc\u015fterek \u00e7ocu\u011fu kendisinden izinsiz bir \u015fekilde ba\u015fka bir \u015fehre g\u00f6t\u00fcrmesi nedeniyle mevcut ki\u015fisel ili\u015fkinin s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 talep etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
4. Buna kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k ba\u015fvurucu 28\/5\/2018 tarihinde a\u00e7t\u0131\u011f\u0131 velayetin de\u011fi\u015ftirilmesi davas\u0131nda \u00e7ocu\u011fuyla aras\u0131ndaki ki\u015fisel ili\u015fkinin anne taraf\u0131ndan engellendi\u011fini ve annenin velayet g\u00f6revinin gereklerini yerine getirmedi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Ayr\u0131ca \u00e7ocu\u011fun psikolojik \u015fiddete maruz kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve annenin \u00f6fke kontrol\u00fc probleminin oldu\u011fu iddia edilmi\u015ftir. Bununla birlikte annenin \u015fiddete meyilli oldu\u011fu, ruh ve beden sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n bozuk oldu\u011fu, alkol probleminin bulundu\u011fu vurgulanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
5. Dava dilek\u00e7esinde \u00f6zetle 20\/5\/2018 g\u00fcn\u00fc \u00e7ocu\u011fun anneye teslimi s\u0131ras\u0131nda annenin \u00e7ok alkoll\u00fc oldu\u011fu, ba\u015fvurucuya “Bunca zamand\u0131r \u00e7ocu\u011fa ben bak\u0131yorum, biraz da sen bak.” dedi\u011fi, a\u015f\u0131r\u0131 alkol kullan\u0131m\u0131 nedeniyle ba\u015fvurucunun hastaneye g\u00f6t\u00fcr\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ancak tedaviyi reddetti\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir. Akabinde ya\u015fanan olaylar \u00fczerine \u00e7ocu\u011fun babas\u0131yla Ankara’ya gitmek istedi\u011fini beyan etti\u011fi, b\u00f6ylelikle ba\u015fvurucunun mevcut ortam\u0131n g\u00fcvenli olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 kanaatiyle \u00e7ocu\u011fuyla Ankara’ya gitti\u011fi ifade edilmi\u015ftir. Sonu\u00e7 olarak ba\u015fvurucu, m\u00fc\u015fterek \u00e7ocu\u011fun \u00fcst\u00fcn yarar\u0131 gere\u011fince velayetinin de\u011fi\u015ftirilerek taraf\u0131na verilmesini talep etmi\u015ftir. Bu davan\u0131n anne taraf\u0131ndan a\u00e7\u0131lan ki\u015fisel ili\u015fkinin de\u011fi\u015ftirilmesi davas\u0131yla birle\u015ftirilmesine karar verilmi\u015f olup her iki davan\u0131n yarg\u0131lamas\u0131 birlikte yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
6. Yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lamada anne ve \u00e7ocu\u011fun bulundu\u011fu yerdeki uzman ile baban\u0131n bulundu\u011fu yerdeki uzman taraf\u0131ndan d\u00fczenlenen iki ayr\u0131 sosyal inceleme raporu al\u0131nm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ayr\u0131ca bildirilen tan\u0131klar dinlenmi\u015ftir. \u00c7ocuk ve anne ile ayr\u0131 ayr\u0131 yap\u0131lan g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fmeler sonunda haz\u0131rlanan 22\/10\/2018 tarihli uzman raporunda annenin olumsuz bir ya\u015fam tarz\u0131na ya da olumsuz bir al\u0131\u015fkanl\u0131\u011fa sahip olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, m\u00fc\u015fterek \u00e7ocu\u011fun y\u0131llard\u0131r bak\u0131m\u0131n\u0131 yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve velayetini alabilecek ki\u015fisel sorumlulukta oldu\u011fu bildirilmi\u015ftir. Bunun yan\u0131nda k\u00fc\u00e7\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn \u00f6\u011fretmenleri ile yap\u0131lan telefon g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fmelerinden k\u00fc\u00e7\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn annesi taraf\u0131ndan ihmal edilen bir \u00e7ocuk olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, aksine s\u0131n\u0131r koyma odakl\u0131 bilin\u00e7li bir ebeveyn tutumu sergilendi\u011fi izlenimi olu\u015ftu\u011fu ifade edilmi\u015ftir. Sonu\u00e7 olarak annenin k\u00fc\u00e7\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn velayetini almas\u0131na engel olabilecek herhangi bir \u00f6zel durumuna rastlanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 belirtilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
7. Ba\u015fvurucunun bulundu\u011fu yerdeki uzman taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lan g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fme sonucunda haz\u0131rlanan 8\/4\/2019 tarihli uzman raporunda ise annenin iddialar\u0131 do\u011frultusunda ba\u015fvurucunun \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 kurumdan \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma saatlerine ve vardiya durumuna ili\u015fkin bilgi sorulmas\u0131, ayr\u0131ca ba\u015fvurucunun bir devlet veya \u00fcniversite hastanesinin psikiyatri b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcne sevki ile psikolojik sa\u011fl\u0131k durumunun ve \u00e7ocu\u011fu ile bir araya gelmesine engel bir h\u00e2linin olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n tespitinin istenmesinin gerekli oldu\u011fu belirtilmi\u015ftir. Belirtilen bu ara\u015ft\u0131rmalar\u0131n sonucunun olumlu gelmesi h\u00e2linde ba\u015fvurucunun \u00e7ocu\u011fun velayetini \u00fcstlenmesinin \u00f6n\u00fcnde engel bir durumun olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ifade edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
8. Bunun yan\u0131nda Mahkeme, \u00e7ocu\u011fu bizzat dinlemi\u015ftir. K\u00fc\u00e7\u00fck 12\/10\/2018 tarihli beyan\u0131nda hem annesini hem babas\u0131n\u0131 sevdi\u011fini, yaz mevsimini babas\u0131yla Ankara’da g\u00fczel bir \u015fekilde ge\u00e7irdi\u011fini, annesinin \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, annesi \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 zamanlarda evde yaln\u0131z kald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, \u0130zmir’de hi\u00e7 arkada\u015f\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 beyan etmi\u015ftir. Ayr\u0131ca annesiyle d\u0131\u015far\u0131 \u00e7\u0131kt\u0131klar\u0131 baz\u0131 vakitlerde sabaha kar\u015f\u0131 eve d\u00f6nd\u00fcklerini, evde genelde annesinin yemek yapamad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, kendisinin pilav veya makarna gibi yemekleri yapmay\u0131 bildi\u011fini, evde \u00e7o\u011fu zaman yaln\u0131z kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u00e7in babas\u0131yla ya\u015famak istedi\u011fini ifade etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
9. Mahkeme, an\u0131lan delilleri de\u011ferlendirerek 17\/1\/2020 tarihinde hem ki\u015fisel ili\u015fkinin de\u011fi\u015ftirilmesi davas\u0131n\u0131n hem de velayetin de\u011fi\u015ftirilmesi davas\u0131n\u0131n reddine karar vermi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvuruya konu velayetin de\u011fi\u015ftirilmesi davas\u0131n\u0131n reddine ili\u015fkin karar\u0131n gerek\u00e7esinde; dinlenen t\u00fcm tan\u0131klar\u0131n ve k\u00fc\u00e7\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn okulunda g\u00f6rev yapan \u00f6\u011fretmenlerin, annenin ilgili bir anne oldu\u011fu, \u00e7ocu\u011fun okula temiz ve d\u00fczenli bir \u015fekilde gitti\u011fi, ihmal edilen bir \u00e7ocuk olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u015feklindeki beyanlar\u0131na itibar edildi\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir. Ayr\u0131ca bilirki\u015fi raporlar\u0131 g\u00f6z\u00f6n\u00fcne al\u0131narak velayet hakk\u0131 kendisinde bulunan annenin velayet y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fcklerine ayk\u0131r\u0131 bir davran\u0131\u015f i\u00e7inde bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 kanaati ile \u00e7ocu\u011fun \u00fcst\u00fcn yarar\u0131 g\u00f6zetilerek davan\u0131n reddine karar verildi\u011fi ifade edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
10. Velayetin de\u011fi\u015ftirilmesi davas\u0131n\u0131n reddine ili\u015fkin karar ba\u015fvurucu taraf\u0131ndan istinaf edilmi\u015ftir. \u0130stinaf ba\u015fvuru dilek\u00e7esinde yarg\u0131lama s\u0131ras\u0131nda annenin daha \u00f6nce psikiyatri klini\u011finde yatt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, uzun s\u00fcreli ila\u00e7 kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, \u015fiddet e\u011filimi oldu\u011funu, \u00f6fke n\u00f6beti ge\u00e7irdi\u011fini belirtmelerine ve bu iddiaya ili\u015fkin medikal ulak kayd\u0131 ile hastane kay\u0131tlar\u0131n\u0131n istenmesini talep etmelerine ra\u011fmen mahkemece bu y\u00f6nde ara\u015ft\u0131rma yap\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, annenin psikolojik sorunu olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n tespit edilmedi\u011fi ve bu iddialar\u0131n gerek\u00e7eli kararda kar\u015f\u0131lanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 belirtilmi\u015ftir. Bunun yan\u0131nda annenin alkol ba\u011f\u0131ml\u0131s\u0131 oldu\u011fu iddias\u0131 bak\u0131m\u0131ndan ise dosyaya sunulan foto\u011fraflar bulunmas\u0131na ra\u011fmen mahkemece ara\u015ft\u0131rma yap\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. \u0130zmir B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 18. Hukuk Dairesi (B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi) 22\/3\/2021 tarihinde ba\u015fvurucunun istinaf ba\u015fvurusunun reddine kesin olarak karar vermi\u015ftir. Karar\u0131n gerek\u00e7esinde velayet hakk\u0131 kendisinde olan annenin velayet g\u00f6revini ihmalinin ya da istismar\u0131n\u0131n ispatlanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, k\u00fc\u00e7\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn \u00fcst\u00fcn yarar\u0131n\u0131n al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 e\u011fitim ve aile \u00e7evresinde olmas\u0131n\u0131 gerektirdi\u011fini, bilirki\u015fi raporlar\u0131nda da velayetin de\u011fi\u015fmesi i\u00e7in somut gerek\u00e7e bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 kanaatiyle ilk derece mahkemesi karar\u0131n\u0131n usul ve kanuna uygun oldu\u011funun de\u011ferlendirildi\u011fini belirtmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
11. Ba\u015fvurucu, nihai h\u00fckm\u00fc 30\/3\/2021 tarihinde \u00f6\u011frendikten sonra 27\/4\/2021 tarihinde bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunmu\u015ftur. Ba\u015fvurucu 30\/4\/2024 tarihli dilek\u00e7esiyle m\u00fc\u015fterek \u00e7ocu\u011fun velayetinin bu bireysel ba\u015fvurudan sonra a\u00e7\u0131lan davada kendisine verildi\u011fini bildirmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
12. Komisyon, ba\u015fvurunun kabul edilebilirlik ve esas incelemesinin B\u00f6l\u00fcm taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
II. DE\u011eERLEND\u0130RME<\/p>\n
13. Ba\u015fvurucu; m\u00fc\u015fterek \u00e7ocu\u011fun kendisinin yan\u0131nda kalmak istedi\u011fine dair beyanlar\u0131na mahkemece gerek\u00e7e sunulmadan itibar edilmemesi, ayr\u0131ca anne hakk\u0131ndaki iddialar\u0131na ili\u015fkin delillerin de\u011ferlendirilmemesi ve gerekli ara\u015ft\u0131rmalar\u0131n yap\u0131lmamas\u0131 nedeniyle gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131 ba\u011flam\u0131nda adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ve \u00e7ocu\u011fun \u00fcst\u00fcn yarar\u0131 g\u00f6zetilmedi\u011finden \u00f6zel hayata ve aile hayat\u0131na sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 (Bakanl\u0131k) g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnde; mevcut ba\u015fvuruda ba\u015fvurucunun aile hayat\u0131na sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edilip edilmedi\u011fi konusunda inceleme yap\u0131l\u0131rken Anayasa ve mevzuat h\u00fck\u00fcmleri do\u011frultusunda somut olay\u0131n kendine \u00f6zg\u00fc ko\u015fullar\u0131n\u0131n dikkate al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fini belirtmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
14. Ba\u015fvurucu, Bakanl\u0131k g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne kar\u015f\u0131 beyan\u0131nda bireysel ba\u015fvuru formundaki iddialar\u0131n\u0131 tekrar etmi\u015ftir. Bunun yan\u0131nda bireysel ba\u015fvuru tarihinden sonra m\u00fc\u015fterek \u00e7ocu\u011fun annesi hakk\u0131nda \u00e7e\u015fitli su\u00e7lardan \u015fik\u00e2yet\u00e7i oldu\u011funu, a\u00e7\u0131lan yeni bir velayet davas\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda m\u00fc\u015fterek \u00e7ocu\u011fun velayetinin kendisine verildi\u011fini, bu nedenle yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmas\u0131nda hukuki gereklilik bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bildirmi\u015ftir. Ancak ba\u015fvuruya konu yarg\u0131lamada pozitif y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fcklerin ihlal edildi\u011fini belirterek ihlalin tespitine ve yasal faiziyle 120.000 TL manevi tazminata h\u00fckmedilmesini talep etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
15. Ba\u015fvurucunun \u015fik\u00e2yetinin \u00f6z\u00fc, velayetin de\u011fi\u015ftirilmesi talepli davada esasa etkili olan deliller de\u011ferlendirilmeden karar verilmesine ili\u015fkin oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lmakla ba\u015fvurucunun iddialar\u0131 bir b\u00fct\u00fcn olarak aile hayat\u0131na sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda incelenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
16. Velayet hakk\u0131na ve ki\u015fisel ili\u015fki kurulmas\u0131na ili\u015fkin uyu\u015fmazl\u0131klar, adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlali iddialar\u0131na s\u0131kl\u0131kla konu olmakla birlikte s\u00fcrecin ivedi olarak y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclmesi de d\u00e2hil olmak \u00fczere ilgili prosed\u00fcrlere ili\u015fkin i\u015flem ve eylemlerin aile hayat\u0131na sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131 ba\u011flam\u0131nda meydana getirdi\u011fi sonu\u00e7lar dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda s\u00f6z konusu iddialar\u0131n aile hayat\u0131na sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131 ba\u011flam\u0131nda ele al\u0131nmas\u0131 uygun g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir (Marcus Frank Cerny [GK], B. No: 2013\/5126, 2\/7\/2015, \u00a7 82; M.M.E. ve T.E., B. No: 2013\/2910, 5\/11\/2015, \u00a7 137).<\/p>\n
17. Aile hayat\u0131na sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda devlet i\u00e7in s\u00f6z konusu olan y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fck, sadece belirtilen hakka keyf\u00ee surette m\u00fcdahaleden ka\u00e7\u0131nmakla s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 olmay\u0131p \u00f6ncelikli olan bu negatif y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011fe ek olarak aile hayat\u0131na etkili bir bi\u00e7imde sayg\u0131n\u0131n sa\u011flanmas\u0131 ba\u011flam\u0131nda pozitif y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fckleri de i\u00e7ermektedir. S\u00f6z konusu pozitif y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fckler, bireyler aras\u0131 ili\u015fkiler alan\u0131nda olsa da aile ya\u015fam\u0131na sayg\u0131y\u0131 sa\u011flamaya y\u00f6nelik tedbirlerin al\u0131nmas\u0131n\u0131 zorunlu k\u0131lar (Murat At\u0131lgan, B. No: 2013\/9047, 7\/5\/2015, \u00a7 26).<\/p>\n
18. Ebeveyn ile \u00e7ocuklar\u0131n birlikte ya\u015fama istekleri, aile hayat\u0131n\u0131n vazge\u00e7ilmez bir unsuru olup ebeveyn aras\u0131nda ortak ya\u015fam\u0131n kurulamamas\u0131 veya hukuken ya da fiilen sona ermi\u015f olmas\u0131 aile hayat\u0131n\u0131 ortadan kald\u0131rmaz. Ebeveyn ve \u00e7ocuk aras\u0131ndaki aile hayat\u0131n\u0131n, anne ve baban\u0131n birlikte ya\u015famamalar\u0131 veya ortak ya\u015fama son vermelerinin ard\u0131ndan da devam edece\u011fi a\u00e7\u0131k olup anne, baba ve \u00e7ocu\u011fun aile hayatlar\u0131na sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131, belirtilen durumlarda ailenin yeniden birle\u015ftirilmesine y\u00f6nelik tedbirleri de i\u00e7ermektedir. S\u00f6z konusu y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fck, ebeveyn veya di\u011fer aile bireyleri aras\u0131ndaki velayet ve ki\u015fisel ili\u015fki tesisine ili\u015fkin uyu\u015fmazl\u0131klar i\u00e7in de ge\u00e7erlidir (Murat At\u0131lgan, \u00a7 25).<\/p>\n
19. Anayasan\u0131n 41. maddesinde ifade edilen \u00e7ocu\u011fun y\u00fcksek yarar\u0131 mahkemeler, idari makamlar ve yasama organ\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lan ve \u00e7ocuklar\u0131 ilgilendiren b\u00fct\u00fcn faaliyetlerde g\u00f6zetilmesi gereken bir ilkedir. Bu ba\u011flamda \u00e7ocuklar \u00fczerinde etki do\u011furacak bir i\u015flem yap\u0131laca\u011f\u0131 zaman bu i\u015flemin \u00e7ocu\u011fun yarar\u0131na uygun olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnde bir de\u011ferlendirme yap\u0131lmas\u0131, aile hayat\u0131na sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6ng\u00f6rd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc pozitif y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fcklerin yerine getirilmesi a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan olduk\u00e7a \u00f6nemlidir (\u015e\u00fckran \u0130rge, B. No: 2016\/8660, 7\/11\/2019, \u00a7 33).<\/p>\n
20. \u00d6te yandan mevzuat\u0131n yorumlanmas\u0131yla ilgili sorunlar\u0131 \u00e7\u00f6zmek \u00f6ncelikle derece mahkemelerinin yetkisi ve sorumluluk alan\u0131ndad\u0131r. \u00c7ocu\u011fun \u00fcst\u00fcn yarar\u0131 ba\u015fvuru konusu dava a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan en \u00f6nemli unsur olup olay\u0131n t\u00fcm taraflar\u0131 ile do\u011frudan temas h\u00e2linde bulunan derece mahkemelerinin olay\u0131n ko\u015fullar\u0131n\u0131 de\u011ferlendirmek a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan daha avantajl\u0131 konumda bulundu\u011fu da tart\u0131\u015fmas\u0131zd\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. Bu nedenle Anayasa Mahkemesi, derece mahkemeleri taraf\u0131ndan izlenen usul\u00fc denetlemekte ve \u00f6zellikle mahkemelerin ki\u015fisel ili\u015fki kurulmas\u0131na ve velayete ili\u015fkin mevzuat h\u00fck\u00fcmlerini yorumlay\u0131p uygularken Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 20. ve 41. maddelerindeki g\u00fcvenceleri g\u00f6zetip g\u00f6zetmedi\u011fini incelemektedir (M.M.E. ve T.E., \u00a7 135).<\/p>\n
21. Somut olayda taraflar\u0131n evlilik birli\u011fi i\u00e7inde m\u00fc\u015fterek bir erkek \u00e7ocuklar\u0131n\u0131n oldu\u011fu, taraflar\u0131n anla\u015fmal\u0131 olarak bo\u015fand\u0131klar\u0131, aralar\u0131ndaki anla\u015fmaya g\u00f6re \u00e7ocu\u011fun velayetinin anneye verildi\u011fi, baba ile ki\u015fisel ili\u015fki tesis edildi\u011fi, ancak taraflar aras\u0131nda ya\u015fanan olaylar nedeniyle ba\u015fvurucunun, velayetin kendisine verilmesi talepli dava a\u00e7t\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
22. Ba\u015fvuru konusu velayetin de\u011fi\u015ftirilmesi davas\u0131na ili\u015fkin yarg\u0131sal s\u00fcre\u00e7 incelendi\u011finde; ilk derece mahkemesinin yarg\u0131lama s\u00fcrecinde taraflar\u0131n tan\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131 ve m\u00fc\u015fterek \u00e7ocu\u011fu bizzat dinledi\u011fi, konuya ili\u015fkin uzman raporlar\u0131 ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir. Bu ba\u011flamda Mahkeme taraf\u0131ndan al\u0131nan 22\/10\/2018 tarihli uzman raporunda annenin olumsuz bir ya\u015fam tarz\u0131na ya da olumsuz bir al\u0131\u015fkanl\u0131\u011fa sahip olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, m\u00fc\u015fterek \u00e7ocu\u011fun y\u0131llard\u0131r bak\u0131m\u0131n\u0131 yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve annenin k\u00fc\u00e7\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn velayetini almas\u0131na engel olabilecek herhangi bir bulguya rastlanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 tespit edilmi\u015ftir. Mahkeme gerek\u00e7eli karar\u0131nda; bilirki\u015fi raporlar\u0131n\u0131n g\u00f6z\u00f6n\u00fcne al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirterek velayet hakk\u0131 kendisinde bulunan annenin velayet y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fcklerine ayk\u0131r\u0131 bir davran\u0131\u015f i\u00e7inde bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 sonucuna ula\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ifade etmi\u015ftir. Bunun yan\u0131nda B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi de karar\u0131nda; annenin velayet g\u00f6revini ihmalinin ya da istismar\u0131n\u0131n ispatlanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, k\u00fc\u00e7\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn \u00fcst\u00fcn yarar\u0131n\u0131n al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 e\u011fitim ve aile \u00e7evresinde olmas\u0131n\u0131 gerektirdi\u011fini, bilirki\u015fi raporlar\u0131nda da velayetin de\u011fi\u015fmesi i\u00e7in somut gerek\u00e7e bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 vurgulam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
23. Velayetin tespitinde uzman raporu, taraflar\u0131n ko\u015fullar\u0131, \u00e7ocu\u011fun maruz kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 olaylar\/riskler g\u00f6zetilerek \u00e7ocu\u011fun fiziksel ve ruhsal geli\u015fimine en uygun \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcm\u00fcn tercih edilmesi ve bunun \u00e7ocu\u011fun yarar\u0131na oldu\u011funun yeterli gerek\u00e7eyle a\u00e7\u0131klanmas\u0131 gerekir (M.\u00d6., B. No: 2019\/36657, 19\/10\/2023, \u00a7 27). Bu ba\u011flamda somut olay\u0131n ko\u015fullar\u0131nda ba\u015fvurucunun vekil ile kendisini temsil ettirdi\u011fi, beyan ve itirazlar\u0131n\u0131 sunabildi\u011fi, dolay\u0131s\u0131yla yarg\u0131lamaya kat\u0131l\u0131m\u0131n\u0131n sa\u011flanm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir. Yarg\u0131lama makamlar\u0131nca taraflar\u0131n hukuki menfaatleri aras\u0131nda bir dengeleme yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve \u00e7ocu\u011fun \u00fcst\u00fcn yarar\u0131 dikkate al\u0131nmak suretiyle velayet ve ki\u015fisel ili\u015fki konusunda yeterli ve ilgili gerek\u00e7e sunularak karar verildi\u011fi kanaatine ula\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
24. Bu durumda; kararlarda yer verilen tespit ve gerek\u00e7e itibar\u0131yla aile hayat\u0131na sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden yarg\u0131sal makamlar\u0131n takdir yetkilerinin s\u0131n\u0131r\u0131n\u0131n a\u015f\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, dolay\u0131s\u0131yla aile hayat\u0131na sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131na y\u00f6nelik bir ihlalin bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131k oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
25. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle ba\u015fvurunun di\u011fer kabul edilebilirlik ko\u015fullar\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden incelenmeksizin a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a dayanaktan yoksun olmas\u0131 nedeniyle kabul edilemez oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
Selahaddin MENTE\u015e bu g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fe kat\u0131lmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
III. H\u00dcK\u00dcM<\/p>\n
A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle;<\/p>\n
A. Aile hayat\u0131na sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a dayanaktan yoksun olmas\u0131 nedeniyle KABUL ED\u0130LEMEZ OLDU\u011eUNA Selahaddin MENTE\u015e’in kar\u015f\u0131oyu ve OY\u00c7OKLU\u011eUYLA,<\/p>\n
B. Yarg\u0131lama giderlerinin ba\u015fvurucu \u00fczerinde BIRAKILMASINA,<\/p>\n
C. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE 10\/12\/2024 tarihinde karar verildi.<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
KAR\u015eIOY<\/p>\n
1. Mahkemenin say\u0131n \u00e7o\u011funlu\u011fu taraf\u0131ndan ba\u015fvurucunun aile hayat\u0131na sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a dayanaktan yoksun olmas\u0131 nedeniyle kabul edilemez oldu\u011funa karar verilmi\u015ftir. A\u015fa\u011f\u0131da belirtece\u011fim gerek\u00e7elerle Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 20. Maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan aile hayat\u0131na sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine karar verilmesi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesiyle say\u0131n \u00e7o\u011funlu\u011fun g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne kat\u0131lmad\u0131m.<\/p>\n
2. Olay ve olgular mahkememizin gerek\u00e7eli karar\u0131nda ayr\u0131nt\u0131l\u0131 olarak \u00f6zetlenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
3. Ba\u015fvurucu; m\u00fc\u015fterek \u00e7ocu\u011fun kendisinin yan\u0131nda kalmak istedi\u011fine dair beyanlar\u0131na mahkemece gerek\u00e7e sunulmadan itibar edilmemesi, ayr\u0131ca anne hakk\u0131ndaki iddialar\u0131na ili\u015fkin delillerin de\u011ferlendirilmemesi ve gerekli ara\u015ft\u0131rmalar\u0131n yap\u0131lmamas\u0131 nedeniyle gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131 ba\u011flam\u0131nda adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ve \u00e7ocu\u011fun \u00fcst\u00fcn yarar\u0131 g\u00f6zetilmedi\u011finden \u00f6zel hayata ve aile hayat\u0131na sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Bakanl\u0131k g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnde; mevcut ba\u015fvuruda ba\u015fvurucunun aile hayat\u0131na sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edilip edilmedi\u011fi konusunda inceleme yap\u0131l\u0131rken Anayasa ve mevzuat h\u00fck\u00fcmleri do\u011frultusunda somut olay\u0131n kendine \u00f6zg\u00fc ko\u015fullar\u0131n\u0131n dikkate al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fini belirtmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
4. Ba\u015fvurucu, Bakanl\u0131k g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne kar\u015f\u0131 beyan\u0131nda bireysel ba\u015fvuru formundaki iddialar\u0131n\u0131 tekrar etmi\u015ftir. Bunun yan\u0131nda bireysel ba\u015fvuru tarihinden sonra m\u00fc\u015fterek \u00e7ocu\u011fun annesi hakk\u0131nda \u00e7e\u015fitli su\u00e7lardan \u015fik\u00e2yet\u00e7i oldu\u011funu, a\u00e7\u0131lan yeni bir velayet davas\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda m\u00fc\u015fterek \u00e7ocu\u011fun velayetinin kendisine verildi\u011fini, bu nedenle yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmas\u0131nda hukuki gereklilik bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bildirmi\u015ftir. Ancak ba\u015fvuruya konu yarg\u0131lamada pozitif y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fcklerin ihlal edildi\u011fini belirterek ihlalin tespitine ve yasal faiziyle 120.000 TL manevi tazminata h\u00fckmedilmesini talep etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
5. Ba\u015fvurucunun \u015fik\u00e2yetinin \u00f6z\u00fc, velayetin de\u011fi\u015ftirilmesi talepli davada esasa etkili olan deliller de\u011ferlendirilmeden karar verilmesine ili\u015fkindir. Bu a\u00e7\u0131klamalar kapsam\u0131nda ba\u015fvurucunun iddialar\u0131n\u0131n bir b\u00fct\u00fcn olarak aile hayat\u0131na sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda incelenebilir nitelikte oldu\u011fu kabul edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
6. 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 aile hayat\u0131na sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n kabul edilebilir oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
7. Aile hayat\u0131na sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda devlet i\u00e7in aile hayat\u0131na etkili bir bi\u00e7imde sayg\u0131n\u0131n sa\u011flanmas\u0131 ba\u011flam\u0131nda pozitif y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fckleri bireyler aras\u0131 ili\u015fkiler alan\u0131nda olsa da aile ya\u015fam\u0131na sayg\u0131y\u0131 sa\u011flamaya y\u00f6nelik tedbirlerin al\u0131nmas\u0131n\u0131 zorunlu k\u0131lar (Murat At\u0131lgan, B. No: 2013\/9047, 7\/5\/2015, \u00a7 26). Devletin pozitif tedbirler alma y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc konusunda Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 20. ve 41. maddeleri; ebeveynin, \u00e7ocu\u011fuyla b\u00fct\u00fcnle\u015fmesinin sa\u011flanmas\u0131 amac\u0131yla tedbirler al\u0131nmas\u0131n\u0131 isteme hakk\u0131n\u0131 ve kamusal makamlar\u0131n bu t\u00fcr tedbirleri alma y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc i\u00e7ermektedir. 41. maddede, her \u00e7ocu\u011fun y\u00fcksek yarar\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131 olmad\u0131k\u00e7a anne ve babas\u0131yla ki\u015fisel ve do\u011frudan ili\u015fki kurma ve s\u00fcrd\u00fcrme hakk\u0131na sahip oldu\u011fu a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a belirtilmektedir (Serpil Toros, B. No: 2013\/6382, 9\/3\/2016, \u00a7 69). S\u00f6z konusu y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fck, ebeveyn veya di\u011fer aile bireyleri aras\u0131ndaki velayet ve ki\u015fisel ili\u015fki tesisine ili\u015fkin uyu\u015fmazl\u0131klar i\u00e7in de ge\u00e7erlidir (Murat At\u0131lgan, \u00a7 25).<\/p>\n
8. \u015e\u00fcphesiz \u00e7ocu\u011fun \u00fcst\u00fcn yarar\u0131n\u0131n ne oldu\u011funa ili\u015fkin tespit, bu t\u00fcr davalarda dikkate al\u0131nmas\u0131 gereken en \u00f6nemli unsurdur (Murat At\u0131lgan, \u00a7 45; Marcus Frank Cerny [GK], B. No: 2013\/5126, 2\/7\/2015, \u00a7 84; N.\u00d6.n, B. No: 2014\/19725, 19\/11\/2015, \u00a7 56). Bununla birlikte derece mahkemelerinin \u00e7ocukla ebeveyn aras\u0131ndaki ili\u015fkileri d\u00fczenleyen kararlar\u0131n\u0131n gerek\u00e7eleri; psikolog, pedagog ve sosyal \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmac\u0131 gibi konusunda uzman bilirki\u015filer taraf\u0131ndan haz\u0131rlanm\u0131\u015f yeterli a\u00e7\u0131kl\u0131ktaki bilimsel g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f ve raporlar ile h\u00e2len bulundu\u011fu yerdeki ya\u015fant\u0131s\u0131na ili\u015fkin gerekli ara\u015ft\u0131rma ve incelemeyle elde edilen somut, nesnel verilere dayand\u0131r\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r. Bu konudaki di\u011fer \u00f6nemli bir husus ise \u00e7ocu\u011fun beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n al\u0131nmas\u0131d\u0131r. \u00c7ocu\u011fun dinlenebilece\u011fi uygun bir ya\u015fa ve olgunlu\u011fa eri\u015fti\u011finin anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde ki\u015fisel ili\u015fki tesisi ve velayetle ilgili beyanlar\u0131 mahkeme taraf\u0131ndan mutlaka dikkate al\u0131nmal\u0131d\u0131r (Bahad\u0131r \u00dcney ve Di\u011ferleri, B. No: 2018\/4453,10\/3\/2022, \u00a7 58).<\/p>\n
9. \u00d6te yandan mevzuat\u0131n yorumlanmas\u0131yla ilgili sorunlar\u0131 \u00e7\u00f6zmek \u00f6ncelikle derece mahkemelerinin yetkisinde ve sorumluluk alan\u0131ndad\u0131r. \u00c7ocu\u011fun \u00fcst\u00fcn yarar\u0131 ba\u015fvuru konusu dava a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan en \u00f6nemli unsur olup olay\u0131n t\u00fcm taraflar\u0131 ile do\u011frudan temas h\u00e2linde bulunan derece mahkemelerinin olay\u0131n ko\u015fullar\u0131n\u0131 de\u011ferlendirmek a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan daha avantajl\u0131 konumda oldu\u011fu da tart\u0131\u015fmas\u0131zd\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. Bu nedenle Anayasa Mahkemesi, derece mahkemeleri taraf\u0131ndan izlenen usul\u00fc denetlemekte; \u00f6zellikle mahkemelerin ki\u015fisel ili\u015fki kurulmas\u0131na ve velayete ili\u015fkin mevzuat h\u00fck\u00fcmlerini yorumlay\u0131p uygularken Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 20. ve 41. maddelerindeki g\u00fcvenceleri g\u00f6zetip g\u00f6zetmedi\u011fini incelemektedir (Bahad\u0131r \u00dcney ve Di\u011ferleri, \u00a7 59; M.M.E. ve T.E., B. No: 2013\/2910, 5\/11\/2015, \u00a7 135).<\/p>\n
10. Somut olayda taraflar\u0131n evlilik birli\u011fi i\u00e7inde m\u00fc\u015fterek bir erkek \u00e7ocuklar\u0131n\u0131n oldu\u011fu, taraflar\u0131n anla\u015fmal\u0131 olarak bo\u015fand\u0131klar\u0131, aralar\u0131ndaki anla\u015fmaya g\u00f6re \u00e7ocu\u011fun velayetinin anneye verildi\u011fi, baba ile ki\u015fisel ili\u015fki tesis edildi\u011fi, ancak taraflar aras\u0131nda ya\u015fanan olaylar nedeniyle ba\u015fvurucunun velayetin kendisine verilmesi talepli dava a\u00e7t\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
11. Ba\u015fvuru konusu velayetin de\u011fi\u015ftirilmesi davas\u0131na ili\u015fkin yarg\u0131sal s\u00fcre\u00e7 incelendi\u011finde; ilk derece mahkemesinin yarg\u0131lama s\u00fcrecinde taraflar\u0131n tan\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131 ve m\u00fc\u015fterek \u00e7ocu\u011fu bizzat dinledi\u011fi, konuya ili\u015fkin uzman raporlar\u0131 ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir. Bu ba\u011flamda mahkeme taraf\u0131ndan al\u0131nan 22\/10\/2018 tarihli uzman raporunda annenin k\u00fc\u00e7\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn velayetini almas\u0131na engel olabilecek herhangi bir bulguya rastlanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 tespit edilmi\u015fse de velayet hakk\u0131 sahibi annenin psikolojik s\u0131k\u0131nt\u0131lar\u0131 bulundu\u011fu, buna ili\u015fkin tedavi g\u00f6rd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc iddias\u0131n\u0131n ileri s\u00fcr\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ve delil olarak hastane kay\u0131tlar\u0131n\u0131n g\u00f6sterildi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. Bunun yan\u0131nda annenin alkol problemi oldu\u011fu ve bu durumun \u00e7ocukla ili\u015fkisine olumsuz yans\u0131malar\u0131 oldu\u011fu iddias\u0131 da ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Ancak yarg\u0131lama makamlar\u0131nca k\u00fc\u00e7\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn velayetinin kime verilece\u011finin tespiti amac\u0131yla ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclen bu ciddi iddialar\u0131n ger\u00e7ekli\u011finin ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve bu iddialar\u0131n s\u00fcbut bulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 noktas\u0131nda da somut, bilimsel ve yeterli gerek\u00e7eye dayanan de\u011ferlendirmelerin yap\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 tespit edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
12. Velayetin tespitinde uzman raporu, taraflar\u0131n ko\u015fullar\u0131, \u00e7ocu\u011fun maruz kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 olaylar\/riskler g\u00f6zetilerek \u00e7ocu\u011fun fiziksel ve ruhsal geli\u015fimine en uygun \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcm\u00fcn tercih edilmesi ve bunun \u00e7ocu\u011fun yarar\u0131na oldu\u011funun yeterli gerek\u00e7eyle a\u00e7\u0131klanmas\u0131 gerekir (M.\u00d6., B. No: 2019\/36657, 19\/10\/2023, \u00a7 27). Buna g\u00f6re yarg\u0131lama s\u00fcreci bir b\u00fct\u00fcn h\u00e2linde de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde; yarg\u0131lama makamlar\u0131n\u0131n kararlar\u0131n\u0131n gerek\u00e7esinin dayand\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 tek ki\u015filik uzman raporundaki g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn annenin psikolojik durumunun tespitine, velayete engel te\u015fkil edebilecek nitelikte bir psikolojik rahats\u0131zl\u0131\u011f\u0131 veyahut alkol ba\u011f\u0131ml\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 bulunup bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na ili\u015fkin de\u011ferlendirme yap\u0131lmas\u0131na elveri\u015fli olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir. Ayr\u0131ca bilirki\u015fi raporlar\u0131nda taraflar\u0131n ko\u015fullar\u0131n\u0131n tam olarak irdelenmedi\u011fi, hastane kay\u0131tlar\u0131 oldu\u011fu bildirilen psikolojik rahats\u0131zl\u0131\u011f\u0131n ve hakk\u0131nda delil sunulan alkol ba\u011f\u0131ml\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddialar\u0131n\u0131n mevcudiyetine ve m\u00fc\u015fterek \u00e7ocu\u011fa yans\u0131malar\u0131na dair bir ara\u015ft\u0131rma ve de\u011ferlendirme sunulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 vurgulanmal\u0131d\u0131r. B\u00f6ylelikle ba\u015fvurucu taraf\u0131ndan a\u015famalarda ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclen, velayet hakk\u0131n\u0131n gere\u011fi gibi kullan\u0131m\u0131na engel olabilecek ve karar sonucunu etkileyebilecek nitelikteki an\u0131lan iddialar hakk\u0131nda yarg\u0131lama makamlar\u0131nca hi\u00e7bir ara\u015ft\u0131rma ve de\u011ferlendirme yap\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi ba\u015fvurucu taraf\u00e7a sunulan ve bildirilen delillere iddialar \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde neden itibar edilmedi\u011finin gerek\u00e7esinin de somut bir \u015fekilde ortaya kondu\u011fundan s\u00f6z etmek m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011fildir.<\/p>\n
13. Bunun yan\u0131nda idrak \u00e7a\u011f\u0131nda olan \u00e7ocu\u011fun ba\u015fvurucunun yan\u0131nda kalmak istedi\u011fine dair beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n ve velayet hususundaki talebinin neden h\u00fckme esas al\u0131nmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na ili\u015fkin yarg\u0131lama makamlar\u0131nca uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011fa \u00f6zg\u00fc yeterli ve ilgili gerek\u00e7e sunulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. Sonu\u00e7 olarak somut olay bak\u0131m\u0131ndan kamu makamlar\u0131n\u0131n pozitif y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fcklerini gere\u011fi gibi yerine getirdi\u011finden ve velayete ili\u015fkin uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcm\u00fcnde taraflar\u0131n ko\u015fullar\u0131na, ya\u015fam \u015fartlar\u0131na ve \u00f6zellikle psikolojik durumlar\u0131na ili\u015fkin olarak yap\u0131lan inceleme ve de\u011ferlendirmelerin ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclen iddialar kapsam\u0131nda yeterli oldu\u011fundan s\u00f6z edilemez. Bu nedenle aile hayat\u0131na sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131na ili\u015fkin Anayasa’da belirtilen g\u00fcvencelerin ve \u00e7ocu\u011fun \u00fcst\u00fcn yarar\u0131 ilkesinin g\u00f6zetilmedi\u011fi ve \u00f6zenli bir yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 kanaatine ula\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
14. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle Anayasa’n\u0131n 20. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan aile hayat\u0131na sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
15. Yukar\u0131da belirtti\u011fim gerek\u00e7elerle say\u0131n \u00e7o\u011funlu\u011fun g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne kat\u0131lmad\u0131m.<\/p>\n
\u00dcye<\/p>\n
\u00a0Selahaddin MENTE\u015e<\/p>\n
\u200bAnayasa Mahkemesi’nin 10\/12\/2024 tarihli ve 2021\/17601 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 B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM \u00a0 KARAR \u00a0 \u00d6. \u00d6. BA\u015eVURUSU (Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2021\/17601) \u00a0 Karar Tarihi: 10\/12\/2024 B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM \u00a0 KARAR \u00a0 \u00a0 Ba\u015fkan : Hasan Tahsin G\u00d6KCAN \u00dcyeler : Recai AKYEL \u00a0 \u00a0 Selahaddin MENTE\u015e \u00a0 \u00a0 Muhterem \u0130NCE \u00a0 \u00a0 Y\u0131lmaz AK\u00c7\u0130L Raport\u00f6r : Ay\u015fenur TUNCER Ba\u015fvurucu : Vekili : Av. Burak Kaan KO\u00c7AK \u00a0 I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130 1. Ba\u015fvuru, m\u00fc\u015fterek \u00e7ocu\u011fun velayetinin de\u011fi\u015ftirilmemesi nedeniyle aile hayat\u0131na sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir. 2. Ba\u015fvurucunun B.Y. ile yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 evlilikten 2008 y\u0131l\u0131nda bir erkek \u00e7ocu\u011fu d\u00fcnyaya gelmi\u015ftir. Taraflar aras\u0131nda g\u00f6r\u00fclen anla\u015fmal\u0131 bo\u015fanma davas\u0131nda taraflar\u0131n bo\u015fanmalar\u0131na, m\u00fc\u015fterek \u00e7ocu\u011fun velayetinin annesine verilmesine, velayeti anneye verilen \u00e7ocuk ile baba aras\u0131nda ki\u015fisel ili\u015fki kurulmas\u0131na ve \u00e7ocuk lehine i\u015ftirak nafakas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir. An\u0131lan karar 27\/9\/2013 tarihinde kesinle\u015fmi\u015ftir. 3. Velayet sahibi anne 25\/5\/2018 tarihinde ki\u015fisel ili\u015fkinin de\u011fi\u015ftirilmesi davas\u0131 a\u00e7m\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Dava dilek\u00e7esinde ba\u015fvurucunun m\u00fc\u015fterek \u00e7ocu\u011fu kendisinden izinsiz bir \u015fekilde ba\u015fka bir \u015fehre g\u00f6t\u00fcrmesi nedeniyle mevcut ki\u015fisel ili\u015fkinin s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 talep etmi\u015ftir. 4. Buna kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k ba\u015fvurucu 28\/5\/2018 tarihinde a\u00e7t\u0131\u011f\u0131 velayetin de\u011fi\u015ftirilmesi davas\u0131nda \u00e7ocu\u011fuyla aras\u0131ndaki ki\u015fisel ili\u015fkinin anne taraf\u0131ndan engellendi\u011fini ve annenin velayet g\u00f6revinin gereklerini yerine getirmedi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Ayr\u0131ca \u00e7ocu\u011fun psikolojik \u015fiddete maruz kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve annenin \u00f6fke kontrol\u00fc probleminin oldu\u011fu iddia edilmi\u015ftir. Bununla birlikte …<\/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-65062","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n