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
MUSTAFA KAYGAS BA\u015eVURUSU<\/p>\n
(Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2020\/39604)<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Karar Tarihi: 27\/11\/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
Kenan YA\u015eAR<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00d6mer \u00c7INAR<\/p>\n
Raport\u00f6r<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
R\u0131dvan DEM\u0130R<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fvurucu<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Mustafa KAYGAS<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130<\/p>\n
1. Ba\u015fvuru, ceza infaz kurumunda kalabal\u0131k odada tutulma nedeniyle k\u00f6t\u00fc muamele yasa\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
2. 20\/8\/2019 tarihinde tutuklu\/h\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fc olarak Antalya L Tipi Kapal\u0131 Ceza \u0130nfaz Kurumunda (\u0130nfaz Kurumu) bar\u0131nd\u0131r\u0131lmaya ba\u015flanan ba\u015fvurucu25\/11\/2023 tarihinde ba\u015fka bir ceza infaz kurumuna nakledilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
3. Ba\u015fvurucu; \u0130nfaz Kurumunda tutuldu\u011fu d\u00f6nemde, kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 odada kalanlar\u0131n fazlal\u0131\u011f\u0131 nedeniyle ko\u015fullar\u0131n uygun olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan \u015fik\u00e2yet ederek ki\u015fi say\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n azalt\u0131lmas\u0131 talebiyle \u0130nfaz H\u00e2kimli\u011fine ba\u015fvurmu\u015ftur. H\u00e2kimlik \u0130nfaz Kurumundan konuyla ilgili bilgi istemi\u015ftir. \u0130nfaz Kurumu bilgileri sundu\u011fu yaz\u0131da “Ceza \u0130nfaz Kurumumuz kapasitesi hen\u00fcz a\u00e7\u0131lmadan artt\u0131r\u0131larak 1250 ki\u015fiye daha sonra 1670 ki\u015fiye \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Kurumumuzun \u015fu an genel mevcudu 1817 ki\u015fidir. Su\u00e7, cinsiyet, ya\u015f, sa\u011fl\u0131k, \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan su\u00e7 grubu, karantina vb. grupland\u0131rmalara tabi tutularak h\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fc ve tutuklular ko\u011fu\u015flara yerle\u015ftirilmektedir. Ceza \u0130nfaz Kurumumuzda t\u00fcm ko\u011fu\u015flarda kapasitesinin \u00fczerinde h\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fc ve tutuklu bar\u0131nd\u0131r\u0131lmakta olup, Cov\u0131d-19 salg\u0131n\u0131n dolay\u0131 kurumlar aras\u0131 nakiller de kapal\u0131d\u0131r.” ifadelerine yer vermi\u015ftir. Yaz\u0131 ekindeki bir belgede her bir ko\u011fu\u015fun kapasitesi ve ko\u011fu\u015flardaki g\u00fcncel mahpus say\u0131s\u0131 belirtilmi\u015ftir. Buna g\u00f6re asl\u0131nda her FET\u00d6\/PDY tutuklusu\/h\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcs\u00fcn\u00fcn kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 ko\u011fu\u015fta kapasitenin \u00fczerinde mahpus bar\u0131nd\u0131r\u0131lmamaktad\u0131r. En az \u00fc\u00e7 ko\u011fu\u015fta kapasitenin alt\u0131nda tutuklu\/h\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fc vard\u0131r. Ayr\u0131ca baz\u0131 tekli odalarda da kapasitenin alt\u0131nda mahpus bulunmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
4. H\u00e2kimlik “Ceza infaz kurumlar\u0131n\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131lmas\u0131 ve kapasitelerinin belirlenmesi Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n g\u00f6rev ve yetki alan\u0131nda bir husus oldu\u011fu, Devletin maddi imkanlar\u0131 do\u011frultusunda ceza infaz kurumlar\u0131n\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve yine bu nispette kapasitelerinin m\u00fcmk\u00fcn oldu\u011funca b\u00fcy\u00fck tutulmaya \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131, infaz kurumunda kapasitenin \u00fczerinde tutuklu ve h\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fc bulunmas\u0131 hususunun s\u00f6z konusu ceza infaz kurumuna \u00f6zg\u00fc olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, \u00fclke genelindeki bir \u00e7ok ceza infaz kurumunda bu durumun mevcut oldu\u011fu, kurumlar\u0131n kapasitelerinin belirlenmesi veya mevcuduna ili\u015fkin tedbirler al\u0131nmas\u0131 4675 say\u0131l\u0131 kanunun 4. maddesi kapsam\u0131nda Hakimli\u011fimizin g\u00f6rev ve yetki alan\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lmakla, ayn\u0131 yasan\u0131n 6 nc\u0131 maddesi uyar\u0131nca h\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcn\u00fcn talebinin usulden reddine dair a\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki \u015fekilde h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmu\u015ftur.” gerek\u00e7esine dayanarak ba\u015fvurucunun \u015fik\u00e2yetini reddetmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
5. Ba\u015fvurucunun H\u00e2kimlik karar\u0131na itiraz\u0131, karar\u0131n usul ve kanuna uygun oldu\u011fu gerek\u00e7esiyle A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesince kesin olarak reddedilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
6. Nihai karar 13\/11\/2020 tarihinde ba\u015fvurucuya tebli\u011f edilmi\u015f, ba\u015fvurucu 10\/12\/2020 tarihinde bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
7. Ba\u015fvurunun kabul edilebilirlik ve esas incelemesinin B\u00f6l\u00fcm taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
8. Anayasa Mahkemesi, \u0130nfaz Kurumundan ba\u015fvurucunun tutuldu\u011fu s\u00fcrece ili\u015fkin ayr\u0131nt\u0131l\u0131 bilgi talep etmi\u015ftir. \u0130nfaz Kurumunun g\u00f6nderdi\u011fi yaz\u0131l\u0131 cevaplara g\u00f6re;<\/p>\n
– Ceza \u0130nfaz Kurumumuzun art\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015f resmi kapasitesi 1670\u2019dir. H\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fc\/Tutuklular\u0131n bar\u0131nd\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00fcniteler 28 ki\u015filik iken, FET\u00d6\/PDY su\u00e7undan \u00e7ok say\u0131da tutuklamalar\u0131n olmas\u0131 nedeniyle \u00dcnitelerin kapasiteleri 40 ki\u015fiye kadar art\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
– Ba\u015fvurucu, ba\u015fvuru tarihi itibariyle C-19 \u00fcnitesinde 34 h\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fc\/tutuklu ile bar\u0131nd\u0131r\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
– Ba\u015fvurucu, ba\u015fvuru tarihine kadar tutuldu\u011fu s\u00fcre boyunca en fazla 33-36 ki\u015fiyle bar\u0131nd\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olup halen \u00fcnitenin mevcudu 34 ki\u015fidir.<\/p>\n
II. DE\u011eERLEND\u0130RME<\/p>\n
9. \u00d6deme g\u00fcc\u00fcnden yoksun oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lan ba\u015fvurucunun adli yard\u0131m talebinin kabul\u00fcne karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
10. Ba\u015fvurucu; bar\u0131nd\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 ko\u011fu\u015fun \u00e7ok kalabal\u0131k olmas\u0131 nedeniyle ciddi problemler oldu\u011funu, H\u00e2kimli\u011fin ko\u011fu\u015ftaki ki\u015fi say\u0131s\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6steren g\u00fcnl\u00fck cetvelleri istemedi\u011fini ve \u015fik\u00e2yetini irdelemedi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnde; ba\u015fvurucunun iddialar\u0131n\u0131n savunulabilir bir iddia olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 hususunun incelenmesinde Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n, mevzuat h\u00fck\u00fcmlerinin, Anayasa Mahkemesi ve Avrupa \u0130nsan Haklar\u0131 Mahkemesi kararlar\u0131n\u0131n dikkate al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu, kar\u015f\u0131 beyan\u0131nda iddialar\u0131n\u0131 tekrarlam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
11. 16\/5\/2001 tarihli ve 4675 say\u0131l\u0131 \u0130nfaz H\u00e2kimli\u011fi Kanunu\u2019nun 4. maddesine g\u00f6re h\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fc ve tutuklular\u0131n ceza infaz kurumlar\u0131 ve tutukevlerine kabul edilmeleri, yerle\u015ftirilmeleri, bar\u0131nd\u0131r\u0131lmalar\u0131, \u0131s\u0131t\u0131lmalar\u0131 ve giydirilmeleri, beslenmeleri, temizliklerinin sa\u011flanmas\u0131, bedensel ve ruhsal sa\u011fl\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n korunmas\u0131 amac\u0131yla muayene ve tedavilerinin yapt\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131, d\u0131\u015far\u0131yla ili\u015fkileri, \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmalar\u0131 gibi i\u015flem veya faaliyetlere ili\u015fkin \u015fik\u00e2yetleri incelemek ve karara ba\u011flamak infaz h\u00e2kimli\u011finin g\u00f6revlerindendir. Buna ra\u011fmen infaz h\u00e2kimli\u011fi, ceza infaz kurumlar\u0131ndaki ko\u011fu\u015f kalabal\u0131kl\u0131\u011f\u0131na ili\u015fkin \u015fik\u00e2yetlerin inf\u00e2z hakimli\u011finin g\u00f6rev alan\u0131na girmedi\u011fi gerek\u00e7esiyle usulden reddine karar vermi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucunun tutulma ko\u015fullar\u0131n\u0131n Anayasa Mahkemesince ilk elden incelenmesi ikincilik ilkesiyle ba\u011fda\u015fmayacakt\u0131r. Bununla birlikte ceza infaz kurumu taraf\u0131ndan verilen bilgiler (bkz. \u00a78) ba\u015fvurucunun k\u00f6t\u00fc muamele yasa\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddias\u0131n\u0131n savunulabilir oldu\u011funu ortaya koymaktad\u0131r. Bu sebeple ba\u015fvuru, k\u00f6t\u00fc muamele yasa\u011f\u0131yla ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 olarak etkili ba\u015fvuru hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda incelenmi\u015ftir (etkili ba\u015fvuru hakk\u0131ndan inceleme i\u00e7in ba\u011flant\u0131 kurulan hak, \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fck ya da yasa\u011f\u0131n savunulabilir olmas\u0131n\u0131n \u015fart oldu\u011funa dair kararlar i\u00e7in bir\u00e7ok karar aras\u0131ndan bkz. Cengiz Kahraman ve Kenan \u00d6zy\u00fcrek, B. No: 2013\/8137, 20\/4\/2016, \u00a7 73).<\/p>\n
12. 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 k\u00f6t\u00fc muamele yasa\u011f\u0131yla ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 olarak etkili ba\u015fvuru hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n kabul edilebilir oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
13. Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 40. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan etkili ba\u015fvuru hakk\u0131 anayasal bir hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcren herkese hakk\u0131n niteli\u011fine uygun olarak iddialar\u0131n\u0131 inceletebilece\u011fi makul, eri\u015filebilir, ihlalin ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmesini veya s\u00fcrmesini engellemeye ya da sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 ortadan kald\u0131rmaya (yeterli giderim sa\u011flamaya) elveri\u015fli idari ve yarg\u0131sal yollara ba\u015fvuruda bulunabilme imk\u00e2n\u0131 sa\u011flar. Bunun i\u00e7in ba\u015fvuru yollar\u0131n\u0131n sadece hukuken mevcut bulunmas\u0131 yeterli olmay\u0131p uygulamada da etkili olmas\u0131, di\u011fer bir ifadeyle ba\u015far\u0131 \u015fans\u0131 sunmas\u0131 gerekir. Bununla birlikte bir ba\u015fvuru yolunun gerek hukuken gerekse uygulamada genel anlamda etkili olmas\u0131, somut olay bak\u0131m\u0131ndan etkili ba\u015fvuru hakk\u0131na ili\u015fkin bir m\u00fcdahale bulunup bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n de\u011ferlendirilmesine engel de\u011fildir (Yusuf Ahmed Abdelaz\u0131m Elsayad, B. No: 2016\/5604, 24\/5\/2018, \u00a7\u00a7 60, 61). Ayr\u0131ca etkili ba\u015fvuru hakk\u0131 bak\u0131m\u0131ndan inceleme yap\u0131labilmesi kural olarak bu hakla aras\u0131nda ba\u011flant\u0131 kurulan hakk\u0131n, \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn ya da yasa\u011f\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine \u00f6nceden karar verilmi\u015f olmas\u0131na ba\u011fl\u0131 de\u011fildir (Abdullah Ya\u015fa [GK], B. No: 2015\/12486, 5\/11\/2020, \u00a7 64).<\/p>\n
14. Anayasa Mahkemesi Hakan Buzhane ([GK], B. No: 2019\/1278, 4\/7\/2024)karar\u0131nda ba\u015fvurucunun tutuldu\u011fu odalar\u0131n kalabal\u0131k olmas\u0131na y\u00f6nelik \u015fik\u00e2yetlerinin yan\u0131 s\u0131ra sa\u011fl\u0131k hizmetinin gerekti\u011fi gibi sa\u011flanamamas\u0131na, hijyen ko\u015fullar\u0131n\u0131n yetersiz oldu\u011funa ve yeterli yemek verilmemesine y\u00f6nelik iddialar\u0131n\u0131 da i\u00e7eren ceza infaz kurumunun ko\u015fullar\u0131n\u0131n uygunsuz oldu\u011funa ili\u015fkin \u015fik\u00e2yetlerinin, \u015fik\u00e2yet konusunun 4675 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun\u2019da d\u00fczenlenen infaz h\u00e2kimliklerinin g\u00f6rev alan\u0131na girmedi\u011fi gerek\u00e7esiyle esasa girilmeden reddedilmesine y\u00f6nelik iddiay\u0131 incelemi\u015ftir. Kararda, dayanak g\u00f6sterilen ilgili mevzuat\u0131n ba\u015fvuruya konu i\u015flemin hukuka ve Anayasa\u2019ya uygun olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n denetlemesini yasaklamad\u0131\u011f\u0131na i\u015faret edilerek \u015fik\u00e2yetin g\u00f6rev y\u00f6n\u00fcnden reddine ili\u015fkin karar\u0131n ilgili ve yeterli gerek\u00e7e i\u00e7ermemesi ve itiraz\u0131n yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 a\u011f\u0131r ceza mahkemesinin de bu eksikli\u011fi gidermeye y\u00f6nelik bir karar vermemesi nedeniyle ba\u015fvurucuya k\u00f6t\u00fc muamele yasa\u011f\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda oldu\u011funu ileri s\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc m\u00fcdahalenin ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 talebiyle ba\u015fvurabilece\u011fi ve asgari g\u00fcvenceleri i\u00e7eren, uygulamada da i\u015fleyen etkili bir hukuk yolunun sunulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, b\u00f6ylece k\u00f6t\u00fc muamele yasa\u011f\u0131yla ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 olarak etkili ba\u015fvuru hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi sonucuna var\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r (an\u0131lan kararda bkz. \u00a7\u00a7 15-17).<\/p>\n
15. Somut olayda ba\u015fvurucunun odalar\u0131n kalabal\u0131k olmas\u0131na ve kalabal\u0131kl\u0131ktan kaynaklanan di\u011fer ko\u015fullara y\u00f6nelik \u015fik\u00e2yeti; \u015fik\u00e2yet konusunun infaz hakimli\u011finin g\u00f6rev alan\u0131na girmedi\u011fi gerek\u00e7esiyle esasa girilmeden, ilgili ve yeterli gerek\u00e7e de sunulmadan reddedilmi\u015ftir. \u0130tiraz\u0131n yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 a\u011f\u0131r ceza mahkemesi de bu eksikli\u011fi gidermeye y\u00f6nelik bir karar vermemi\u015ftir. Yarg\u0131 mercilerinin bu yakla\u015f\u0131m\u0131, bar\u0131nd\u0131r\u0131lma ko\u015fullar\u0131n\u0131n k\u00f6t\u00fc muamele olu\u015fturup olu\u015fturmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n tespitini ve \u015fayet k\u00f6t\u00fc muamele olu\u015fturuyor ise ihlalin sona erdirilmesini engellemi\u015ftir. Bu sebeple ba\u015fvurucuya k\u00f6t\u00fc muamele yasa\u011f\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda oldu\u011funu ileri s\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc m\u00fcdahalenin ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 talebiyle ba\u015fvurabilece\u011fi ve asgari g\u00fcvenceleri i\u00e7eren, uygulamada da i\u015fleyen etkili bir hukuk yolunun sunulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 sonucuna var\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
16. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 17. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan k\u00f6t\u00fc muamele yasa\u011f\u0131yla ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 olarak Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 40. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan etkili ba\u015fvuru hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
III. G\u0130DER\u0130M <\/p>\n
17. Ba\u015fvurucu, ihlalin tespiti ve 500.000 TL manevi tazminat talebinde bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
18. Ba\u015fvuruda, ba\u015fvurucunun 25\/11\/2023 tarihinde ba\u015fka bir ceza infaz kurumuna nakledildi\u011fi dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda tespit edilen hak ihlalinin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmas\u0131nda hukuki yarar bulunmamaktad\u0131r. Ancak benzer hak ihlallerinin engellenmesi a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin ihlale yol a\u00e7an yarg\u0131 merciine g\u00f6nderilmesi gerekir. \u0130hlalin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n b\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fcyle ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131labilmesi i\u00e7in ba\u015fvurucuya manevi zararlar\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131nda 100.000 TL manevi tazminat \u00f6denmesine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
IV. H\u00dcK\u00dcM<\/p>\n
A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle;<\/p>\n
A. Adli yard\u0131m talebinin KABUL\u00dcNE,<\/p>\n
B. K\u00f6t\u00fc muamele yasa\u011f\u0131yla ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 olarak etkili ba\u015fvuru hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n KABUL ED\u0130LEB\u0130L\u0130R OLDU\u011eUNA,<\/p>\n
C. Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 17. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan k\u00f6t\u00fc muamele yasa\u011f\u0131yla ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 olarak Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 40. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan etkili ba\u015fvuru hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130HLAL ED\u0130LD\u0130\u011e\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
D. Ba\u015fvurucuya net 100.000 TL manevi tazminat \u00d6DENMES\u0130NE, tazminata ili\u015fkin di\u011fer taleplerin REDD\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
E. \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
F. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin bilgi i\u00e7in Antalya 1. \u0130nfaz H\u00e2kimli\u011fine (E.2020\/2470, K.2020\/2588 say\u0131l\u0131 karar) G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
G. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE 27\/11\/2024 tarihinde OYB\u0130RL\u0130\u011e\u0130YLE karar verildi.<\/p>\n
\u200bAnayasa Mahkemesi’nin 27\/11\/2024 tarihli ve 2020\/39604 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 MUSTAFA KAYGAS BA\u015eVURUSU (Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2020\/39604) \u00a0 Karar Tarihi: 27\/11\/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 Kenan YA\u015eAR \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00d6mer \u00c7INAR Raport\u00f6r : R\u0131dvan DEM\u0130R Ba\u015fvurucu : Mustafa KAYGAS \u00a0 I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130 1. Ba\u015fvuru, ceza infaz kurumunda kalabal\u0131k odada tutulma nedeniyle k\u00f6t\u00fc muamele yasa\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir. 2. 20\/8\/2019 tarihinde tutuklu\/h\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fc olarak Antalya L Tipi Kapal\u0131 Ceza \u0130nfaz Kurumunda (\u0130nfaz Kurumu) bar\u0131nd\u0131r\u0131lmaya ba\u015flanan ba\u015fvurucu25\/11\/2023 tarihinde ba\u015fka bir ceza infaz kurumuna nakledilmi\u015ftir. 3. Ba\u015fvurucu; \u0130nfaz Kurumunda tutuldu\u011fu d\u00f6nemde, kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 odada kalanlar\u0131n fazlal\u0131\u011f\u0131 nedeniyle ko\u015fullar\u0131n uygun olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan \u015fik\u00e2yet ederek ki\u015fi say\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n azalt\u0131lmas\u0131 talebiyle \u0130nfaz H\u00e2kimli\u011fine ba\u015fvurmu\u015ftur. H\u00e2kimlik \u0130nfaz Kurumundan konuyla ilgili bilgi istemi\u015ftir. \u0130nfaz Kurumu bilgileri sundu\u011fu yaz\u0131da “Ceza \u0130nfaz Kurumumuz kapasitesi hen\u00fcz a\u00e7\u0131lmadan artt\u0131r\u0131larak 1250 ki\u015fiye daha sonra 1670 ki\u015fiye \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Kurumumuzun \u015fu an genel mevcudu 1817 ki\u015fidir. Su\u00e7, cinsiyet, ya\u015f, sa\u011fl\u0131k, \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan su\u00e7 grubu, karantina vb. grupland\u0131rmalara tabi tutularak h\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fc ve tutuklular ko\u011fu\u015flara yerle\u015ftirilmektedir. Ceza \u0130nfaz Kurumumuzda t\u00fcm ko\u011fu\u015flarda kapasitesinin \u00fczerinde h\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fc ve tutuklu bar\u0131nd\u0131r\u0131lmakta olup, Cov\u0131d-19 salg\u0131n\u0131n dolay\u0131 kurumlar aras\u0131 nakiller de kapal\u0131d\u0131r.” ifadelerine yer vermi\u015ftir. Yaz\u0131 ekindeki bir belgede her …<\/p>","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[27],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-30458","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n