T\u00fcrkiye Barolar Birli\u011fi eski Ba\u015fkan\u0131 Metin Feyzio\u011flu,\u00a0T\u00fcrkiye’nin Lefko\u015fa B\u00fcy\u00fckel\u00e7ili\u011fine atanmas\u0131 \u00fczerine sosyal medyadan yap\u0131lan hakaretlere ili\u015fkin\u00a0a\u00e7t\u0131\u011f\u0131 manevi tazminat davas\u0131n\u0131n reddedilmesi sonras\u0131\u00a0Anayasa Mahkemesi’ne bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulundu.<\/p>\n
Feyzio\u011flu’nun hakl\u0131 bulan AYM,\u00a0\u015feref ve itibar\u0131n korunmas\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine karar verdi.<\/p>\n
Anayasa Mahkemesi’nin 12\/6\/2024 tarihli ve 2022\/26271 ba\u015fvuru numaral\u0131 karar\u0131 \u015f\u00f6yle;<\/p>\n
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
MET\u0130N FEYZ\u0130O\u011eLU BA\u015eVURUSU<\/p>\n
(Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2022\/26271)<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Karar Tarihi: 12\/6\/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
Ekin \u00c7ANKAL<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fvurucu<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Metin FEYZ\u0130O\u011eLU<\/p>\n
Vekili<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Av. Muhammet Furkan KAMALAK<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130<\/p>\n
1. Ba\u015fvuru, kendisine y\u00f6neltilen birtak\u0131m ifadeler sebebiyle a\u00e7t\u0131\u011f\u0131 manevi tazminat davas\u0131n\u0131n reddedilmesinin ba\u015fvurucunun \u015feref ve itibar\u0131n\u0131n korunmas\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131 ihlal etti\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
2. 1969 do\u011fumlu olan ba\u015fvurucu, ceza hukuku profes\u00f6r\u00fc olup 2013-2021 y\u0131llar\u0131 aras\u0131nda T\u00fcrkiye Barolar Birli\u011fi Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 yapm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. 30\/10\/2022 tarihinde T\u00fcrkiye’nin Lefko\u015fa B\u00fcy\u00fckel\u00e7ili\u011fine atanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
3. Ba\u015fvurucunun isminin ve foto\u011fraf\u0131n\u0131n yer ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 bir Facebook payla\u015f\u0131m\u0131ndaki ifadeler \u015f\u00f6yledir:<\/p>\n
“Ba\u015faraca\u011f\u0131z! Ba\u015faraca\u011f\u0131z! T\u00fcrkiyeyi i\u00e7 sava\u015fa s\u00fcr\u00fcklemek isteyen hain fet\u00f6c\u00fcleri ve bu hainlerle el ele vermi\u015f olan Pkk’l\u0131lar\u0131 ve onlar\u0131n tetik\u00e7i\u015fi hain Dhkpc’lileri ve her t\u00fcrl\u00fc ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fc Allah’\u0131n izniyle T\u00fcrk milleti ve T\u00fcrk devleti kahredece\u011fiz. Metin Feyzio\u011flu T\u00fcrkiye Barolar Birli\u011fi Ba\u015fkan\u0131”<\/p>\n
4. Mezk\u00fbr payla\u015f\u0131m\u0131n alt\u0131na 4\/2\/2019 tarihinde a\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki yorum yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r:<\/p>\n
“Pezevenkler 28 \u015eubatta iki milyon ki\u015fi \u00f6lm\u00fc\u015f \u00f6nemli de\u011fil diyorlard\u0131 irtica pkk’dan daha tehlikeli diyorlard\u0131 ne oldu da bizleri d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcr oldular” <\/p>\n
5. Ba\u015fvurucu s\u00f6z konusu yorumda kendisine hakaret etti\u011fi iddias\u0131yla payla\u015f\u0131m\u0131 yapan ki\u015fi (daval\u0131) aleyhine 7.000 TL’lik manevi tazminat davas\u0131 a\u00e7m\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. \u0130lk derece mahkemesi manevi tazminat isteminin reddine karar vermi\u015ftir. Mahkeme gerek\u00e7esinde ihtilafa konu sosyal medya payla\u015f\u0131m\u0131nda genel ifadeler kullan\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, ba\u015fvurucunun a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a hedef al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n tespit edilemedi\u011fini, matufiyet \u015fart\u0131n\u0131n sa\u011flanamad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, ki\u015filik haklar\u0131na sald\u0131r\u0131n\u0131n ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmedi\u011fini de\u011ferlendirmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
6. \u0130lk derece mahkemesi karar\u0131n\u0131n istinaf edilmesi \u00fczerine B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi istinaf isteminin reddine kesin olarak karar vermi\u015ftir. \u0130lgili karar\u0131n gerek\u00e7esinde, kamunun tan\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131 ki\u015filerin \u015feref ve itibar\u0131 ile ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn \u00e7at\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 durumda ikisi aras\u0131nda makul bir denge kurulmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi belirtilmi\u015f; a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a Anayasa Mahkemesinin dengeleme \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fctlerine yer verilmi\u015ftir. Bu ba\u011flamda, ihtilafa konu ifadelerin ba\u015fvurucunun a\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131 \u00fczerine kendisinin bir d\u00f6nemin ma\u011fduru oldu\u011funu d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnen daval\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan cevaben sarf edildi\u011fini, yasa d\u0131\u015f\u0131 \u00f6rg\u00fctlerle ilgili a\u00e7\u0131klamaya tepki niteli\u011finde oldu\u011funu kabul eden B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi, ifadenin b\u00fct\u00fcn olarak de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde ba\u015fvurucunun ki\u015fili\u011fini de\u011fil beyanlar\u0131n\u0131 hedef ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, daval\u0131n\u0131n as\u0131l ele\u015ftirisinin 28 \u015eubat s\u00fcrecinde yap\u0131lan haks\u0131zl\u0131klara ili\u015fkin oldu\u011funu, ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc kapsam\u0131nda kald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 vurgulam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
7. Ba\u015fvurucu vekilinin ilgili karar\u0131 Ulusal Yarg\u0131 A\u011f\u0131 Bili\u015fim Sistemi (UYAP) \u00fczerinden 3\/3\/2022 tarihinde \u00f6\u011frendi\u011fi tespit edilmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu 16\/3\/2022 tarihinde bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunmu\u015ftur. Ba\u015fvurunun kabul edilebilirlik ve esas incelemesinin B\u00f6l\u00fcm taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
II. DE\u011eERLEND\u0130RME<\/p>\n
8. Ba\u015fvurucu; daval\u0131n\u0131n, foto\u011fraf\u0131n\u0131n alt\u0131na yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 yorumla kendisine hakaret etti\u011fini, savc\u0131l\u0131\u011fa sunulan \u015fik\u00e2yet dilek\u00e7esi ile daval\u0131 aleyhine kovu\u015fturma yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve daval\u0131n\u0131n alenen hakaret su\u00e7unu i\u015fledi\u011finin kabul\u00fc ile daval\u0131ya adli para cezas\u0131 verildi\u011fini, h\u00fckm\u00fcn a\u00e7\u0131klanmas\u0131n\u0131n geri b\u0131rak\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirtmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu, buna ra\u011fmen hukuk yarg\u0131lamas\u0131nda “pezevenk” kelimesinin ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc kapsam\u0131nda kald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 de\u011ferlendiren yarg\u0131 mercilerinin karar\u0131n\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a ba\u015fvurucunun \u015feref ve itibar\u0131n\u0131n korunmas\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131 ihlal etti\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
9. Ba\u015fvurucunun iddialar\u0131n\u0131n Anayasa’n\u0131n 17. maddesinde d\u00fczenlenen \u015feref ve itibar\u0131n korunmas\u0131 hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda incelenmesi gerekti\u011fi de\u011ferlendirilmi\u015ftir. Somut olayda, ba\u015fvurucunun \u015feref ve itibar\u0131n\u0131n korunmas\u0131 hakk\u0131 ile daval\u0131n\u0131n ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn \u00e7at\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir. Devletin, bireylerin maddi ve manevi varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n korunmas\u0131 ile ilgili pozitif y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fckleri \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde \u015feref ve itibar\u0131n korunmas\u0131 hakk\u0131 ile daval\u0131n\u0131n Anayasa\u2019da g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nm\u0131\u015f olan ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnden yararlanma hakk\u0131 aras\u0131nda adil bir denge kurmas\u0131 gerekir. Bu kapsamda dengeleme yap\u0131l\u0131rken kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 gereken \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fctler genel olarak \u015funlard\u0131r:<\/p>\n
i. \u0130fadelerin kim taraf\u0131ndan dile getirildi\u011fi (Nihat Zeybekci, B. No: 2015\/5633, 8\/5\/2019, \u00a7 29; Kemal K\u0131l\u0131\u00e7daro\u011flu, B. No: 2014\/1577, 25\/10\/2017, \u00a7 59),<\/p>\n
ii. Hedef al\u0131nan ki\u015finin kim oldu\u011fu, \u00fcnl\u00fcl\u00fck derecesi ile ilgili ki\u015finin \u00f6nceki davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131, katlanmas\u0131 gereken, kabul edilebilir ele\u015ftiri s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131n\u0131n sade bir vatanda\u015f ile kar\u015f\u0131la\u015ft\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131nda daha geni\u015f olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 (hedef al\u0131nan ki\u015finin kamusal yetki kullanan bir g\u00f6revli olmas\u0131 nedeniyle yap\u0131lan de\u011ferlendirmelerin bulundu\u011fu kararlar i\u00e7in bkz. Ali Suat Ertosun (7), B. No: 2014\/1416, 15\/10\/2015, \u00a7 36; Z\u00fcbeyde F\u00fcsun \u00dcstel ve di\u011ferleri [GK], B. No: 2018\/17635, 26\/7\/2019, \u00a7\u00a7 128, 129; Nilg\u00fcn Halloran, B. No: 2012\/1184, 16\/7\/2014, \u00a7 45; \u0130lhan Cihaner (2), B. No: 2013\/5574, 30\/6\/2014, \u00a7 82; Kadir Sa\u011fd\u0131\u00e7 [GK], B. No: 2013\/6617, 8\/4\/2015, \u00a7\u00a7 60-66; hedef al\u0131nan ki\u015finin siyaset\u00e7i olmas\u0131 nedeniyle yap\u0131lan de\u011ferlendirmelerin bulundu\u011fu kararlar i\u00e7in bkz. Bekir Co\u015fkun [GK], B. No: 2014\/12151, 4\/6\/2015, \u00a7\u00a7 66, 67; Erg\u00fcn Poyraz (2) [GK], B. No: 2013\/8503, 27\/10\/2015, \u00a7 56; Kemal K\u0131l\u0131\u00e7daro\u011flu, \u00a7\u00a7 59-61),<\/p>\n
iii. \u0130fadelerin genel yarara ili\u015fkin bir tart\u0131\u015fmaya katk\u0131 sa\u011flay\u0131p sa\u011flamad\u0131\u011f\u0131, kamuoyu ile di\u011fer ki\u015filerin d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnce a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda sahip olduklar\u0131 haklar\u0131n a\u011f\u0131rl\u0131\u011f\u0131 (Bekir Co\u015fkun, \u00a7 69; \u00c7etin Do\u011fan (2) [GK], B. No: 2014\/3494, 27\/2\/2019, \u00a7 62; Erg\u00fcn Poyraz (2), \u00a7 56; Kadir Sa\u011fd\u0131\u00e7, \u00a7\u00a7 60-66; \u0130lhan Cihaner (2), \u00a7\u00a7 66-73; Nihat Zeybekci, \u00a7 32),<\/p>\n
iv. Kamuyu bilgilendirme de\u011feri, toplumsal ilginin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve konunun g\u00fcncel olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 (Seray \u015eahiner \u00d6zkan, B. No: 2016\/6439, 9\/6\/2021, \u00a7 44; \u0130brahim Okur (2), B. No: 2018\/12363, 26\/5\/2021, \u00a7 28),<\/p>\n
v. \u015eik\u00e2yet\u00e7inin kendisine y\u00f6neltilen ifadelere cevap verme olana\u011f\u0131n\u0131n bulunup bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 (Temel Co\u015fkun, B. No: 2017\/1632, 29\/1\/2020, \u00a7 33; \u015eaban Sevin\u00e7 (2), B. No: 2016\/36777, 26\/5\/2021, \u00a7 42; Nihat Zeybekci, \u00a7 39),<\/p>\n
vi. \u0130fadelerin hedef al\u0131nan ki\u015finin hayat\u0131 \u00fczerindeki etkisi (Ali Suat Ertosun (2), B. No: 2013\/1592, 20\/5\/2015, \u00a7 33; H\u00fcseyin Kocab\u0131y\u0131k, B. No: 2020\/15593, 22\/11\/2022, \u00a7 24),<\/p>\n
vii. Cezaland\u0131rmaya konu edilen ifadelerin kullan\u0131ld\u0131klar\u0131 ba\u011flam\u0131ndan kopart\u0131l\u0131p kopart\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 (Nilg\u00fcn Halloran, \u00a7 52; Bekir Co\u015fkun, \u00a7\u00a7 62, 63; \u00d6nder Bal\u0131k\u00e7\u0131, B. No: 2014\/6009, 15\/2\/2017, \u00a7 45, Nihat Zeybekci, \u00a7 36),<\/p>\n
viii. Ba\u015fvurucunun yapt\u0131r\u0131ma maruz kalma endi\u015fesinin ba\u015fvurucu \u00fczerinde cayd\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 etki yarat\u0131p yaratmayaca\u011f\u0131 (benzer y\u00f6ndeki de\u011ferlendirmeler i\u00e7in bkz. Erg\u00fcn Poyraz (2), \u00a7 79; Kemal K\u0131l\u0131\u00e7daro\u011flu ve Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi, B. No: 2014\/12482, 8\/5\/2019, \u00a7 46),<\/p>\n
ix. Dava konusu s\u00f6ylemlerin maddi vak\u0131alar\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131klanmas\u0131 veya de\u011fer yarg\u0131s\u0131 olarak nitelendirilip nitelendirilemeyece\u011fi (Durmu\u015f Fikri Sa\u011flar (2) [GK], B. No: 2017\/29735, 17\/3\/2021, \u00a7 50; Deniz Karadeniz ve di\u011ferleri [GK], B. No: 2014\/18001, 6\/2\/2020, \u00a7\u00a7 48-49).<\/p>\n
10. Daval\u0131n\u0131n ihtilafl\u0131 yorumu kendisine hakaret etme amac\u0131yla yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcren ba\u015fvurucu, \u00fclke \u00e7ap\u0131nda tan\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131\u011f\u0131 y\u00fcksek bir ki\u015fidir. Ba\u015fvurucu, Ankara \u00dcniversitesi Hukuk Fak\u00fcltesinde profes\u00f6r olarak g\u00f6rev alm\u0131\u015f, daha sonra T\u00fcrkiye Barolar Birli\u011fi Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 yapm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucu uzunca bir s\u00fcre T\u00fcrkiye’nin devlet ve toplum hayat\u0131na ili\u015fkin tart\u0131\u015fmalarda aktif olarak yer alm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Daval\u0131 ise s\u00f6z konusu payla\u015f\u0131m\u0131nda, ba\u015fvurucunun s\u00f6zlerinden hareket ederek 28 \u015eubat s\u00fcrecinden g\u00fcn\u00fcm\u00fcze, siyasi duru\u015flar\u0131n\u0131 de\u011fi\u015ftirenleri genelleme yoluyla ele\u015ftirmi\u015ftir. 28 \u015eubat s\u00fcreci olarak adland\u0131r\u0131lan d\u00f6nemde ma\u011fduriyet ya\u015fad\u0131\u011f\u0131 tahmin edilen daval\u0131n\u0131n, y\u0131llar i\u00e7erisinde politik arenada yer alan ki\u015filerin d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnce ve tutumlar\u0131ndaki de\u011fi\u015fimleri samimi bulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 sert bir \u00fcslupla dile getirdi\u011fini de\u011ferlendirmek m\u00fcmk\u00fcnd\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
11. Kullan\u0131lan dil ve \u00fcslup T\u00fcrk toplumunun bir k\u0131sm\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan kaba bulunabilir ve ifadeler muhatab\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan rahats\u0131z edici olabilir. Ancak Anayasa Mahkemesinin pek \u00e7ok karar\u0131nda benimsedi\u011fi gibi demokratik bir toplumun zorunlu temellerinden olan ve toplumun ilerlemesi ve bireyin \u00f6zg\u00fcveni i\u00e7in gerekli temel \u015fartlardan birini te\u015fkil eden ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc, sadece kabul g\u00f6ren veya zarars\u0131z yahut kay\u0131ts\u0131zl\u0131k i\u00e7eren bilgiler ya da fikirler i\u00e7in de\u011fil, ayn\u0131 zamanda k\u0131r\u0131c\u0131, \u015fok edici veya rahats\u0131z edici olanlar i\u00e7in de ge\u00e7erlidir (Emin Ayd\u0131n (2), B. No: 2013\/3178, 25\/6\/2015, \u00a7 35; Bekir Co\u015fkun, \u00a7 52). Her ne kadar s\u00f6yleyeninin tek amac\u0131n\u0131n hakaret etmek oldu\u011fu sald\u0131rgan bir s\u00f6ylem ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc korumas\u0131n\u0131n d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda kalabilse de \u00fcslubun bir par\u00e7as\u0131n\u0131 olu\u015fturabilen kaba ve nezaket d\u0131\u015f\u0131 ifadeler ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc korumas\u0131ndan faydalanabilir (Ceyhun Tun\u00e7, B. No: 2017\/20822, 14\/9\/2021, \u00a7 43).<\/p>\n
12. Somut olaya gelince, her ne kadar yarg\u0131 mercileri Anayasa Mahkemesinin ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ile \u015feref ve itibar\u0131n korunmas\u0131 hakk\u0131 aras\u0131nda dengeleme yaparken dikkate al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fini vurgulad\u0131\u011f\u0131 kriterler \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda ayr\u0131nt\u0131l\u0131 bir de\u011ferlendirme yapm\u0131\u015fsa da Anayasa Mahkemesi somut olayda sarf edilen “pezevenk” ifadesinin ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131 i\u00e7inde kalamayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 de\u011ferlendirmi\u015ftir. Zira s\u00f6z konusu ifade her ne kadar belli bir ba\u011flam i\u00e7inde ve \u00f6nceki ifadeye cevap mahiyetinde kullan\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131nda ifade h\u00fcrriyeti kapsam\u0131nda de\u011ferlendirilebilse de (bu y\u00f6nde bkz. U\u011furlu Gazetecilik Bas\u0131n Yay\u0131n Matbaac\u0131l\u0131k Reklamc\u0131l\u0131k Ltd. \u015eti. (5), B. No: 2017\/4786, 28\/1\/2020, \u00a7 39) somut olayda daval\u0131, ba\u015fvurucunun ba\u015fka bir konudaki d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnce a\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131na cevap olarak an\u0131lan ifadeyi ilk kez kullanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu durumda ba\u015fvurucunun a\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 daval\u0131n\u0131n sarf etti\u011fi s\u00f6z\u00fcn net bir ba\u011flam ili\u015fkisi oldu\u011fu de\u011ferlendirilememektedir. \u015eu h\u00e2lde, yarg\u0131 mercilerinin ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ile \u015feref ve itibar\u0131n korunmas\u0131 hakk\u0131 aras\u0131ndaki dengeleme yaparken ba\u015fvurucunun \u015feref ve itibar\u0131n\u0131n korunmas\u0131 hakk\u0131na yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 m\u00fcdahalenin demokratik toplumda zorunlu bir sosyal ihtiyac\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131lad\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6ylenemez.<\/p>\n
13. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 17. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan \u015feref ve itibar\u0131n korunmas\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
III. G\u0130DER\u0130M <\/p>\n
14. Ba\u015fvurucu; ihlalin tespiti ile yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verilmesi, yeniden yarg\u0131lama talebi kabul g\u00f6rmezse 20.000 TL manevi tazminat talebinde bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
15. 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
16. Ba\u015fvurucunun terditli talebiyle ba\u011fl\u0131 kal\u0131narak manevi tazminat takdir edilmemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
IV. H\u00dcK\u00dcM<\/p>\n
A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle;<\/p>\n
A. \u015eeref ve itibar\u0131n korunmas\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n KABUL ED\u0130LEB\u0130L\u0130R OLDU\u011eUNA,<\/p>\n
B. Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 17. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan \u015feref ve itibar\u0131n korunmas\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130HLAL ED\u0130LD\u0130\u011e\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
C. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin \u015feref ve itibar\u0131n korunmas\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131nihlalinin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmak \u00fczere Ankara 5. Asliye Hukuk Mahkemesine (E.2020\/83, K. 2021\/627) G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
D. 664,10 TL har\u00e7 ve 18.800 TL vek\u00e2let \u00fccretinden olu\u015fan toplam 19.464,10 TL yarg\u0131lama giderinin ba\u015fvurucuya \u00d6DENMES\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 Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE 12\/6\/2024 tarihinde OYB\u0130RL\u0130\u011e\u0130YLE karar verildi.<\/p>\n
\u200bAnayasa Mahkemesi, kendisine y\u00f6neltilen ifadeler sebebiyle a\u00e7t\u0131\u011f\u0131 manevi tazminat davas\u0131n\u0131n reddedilmesi \u00fczerine bireysel ba\u015fvuru yoluna giden T\u00fcrkiye Barolar Birli\u011fi eski Ba\u015fkan\u0131 Metin Feyzio\u011flu’nu hakl\u0131 buldu.\u00a0Hukuki Haber<\/p>\n
Haberin Al\u0131nt\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131 Kaynak: www.hukukihaber.net<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
T\u00fcrkiye Barolar Birli\u011fi eski Ba\u015fkan\u0131 Metin Feyzio\u011flu,\u00a0T\u00fcrkiye’nin Lefko\u015fa B\u00fcy\u00fckel\u00e7ili\u011fine atanmas\u0131 \u00fczerine sosyal medyadan yap\u0131lan hakaretlere ili\u015fkin\u00a0a\u00e7t\u0131\u011f\u0131 manevi tazminat davas\u0131n\u0131n reddedilmesi sonras\u0131\u00a0Anayasa Mahkemesi’ne bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulundu. Feyzio\u011flu’nun hakl\u0131 bulan AYM,\u00a0\u015feref ve itibar\u0131n korunmas\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine karar verdi. Anayasa Mahkemesi’nin 12\/6\/2024 tarihli ve 2022\/26271 ba\u015fvuru numaral\u0131 karar\u0131 \u015f\u00f6yle; T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CUMHUR\u0130YET\u0130 ANAYASA MAHKEMES\u0130 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM \u00a0 KARAR \u00a0 MET\u0130N FEYZ\u0130O\u011eLU BA\u015eVURUSU (Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2022\/26271) \u00a0 Karar Tarihi: 12\/6\/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 : Ekin \u00c7ANKAL Ba\u015fvurucu : Metin FEYZ\u0130O\u011eLU Vekili : Av. Muhammet Furkan KAMALAK \u00a0 I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130 1. Ba\u015fvuru, kendisine y\u00f6neltilen birtak\u0131m ifadeler sebebiyle a\u00e7t\u0131\u011f\u0131 manevi tazminat davas\u0131n\u0131n reddedilmesinin ba\u015fvurucunun \u015feref ve itibar\u0131n\u0131n korunmas\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131 ihlal etti\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir. 2. 1969 do\u011fumlu olan ba\u015fvurucu, ceza hukuku profes\u00f6r\u00fc olup 2013-2021 y\u0131llar\u0131 aras\u0131nda T\u00fcrkiye Barolar Birli\u011fi Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 yapm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. 30\/10\/2022 tarihinde T\u00fcrkiye’nin Lefko\u015fa B\u00fcy\u00fckel\u00e7ili\u011fine atanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. 3. Ba\u015fvurucunun isminin ve foto\u011fraf\u0131n\u0131n yer ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 bir Facebook payla\u015f\u0131m\u0131ndaki ifadeler \u015f\u00f6yledir: “Ba\u015faraca\u011f\u0131z! Ba\u015faraca\u011f\u0131z! T\u00fcrkiyeyi i\u00e7 sava\u015fa s\u00fcr\u00fcklemek isteyen hain fet\u00f6c\u00fcleri ve bu hainlerle el ele vermi\u015f olan Pkk’l\u0131lar\u0131 ve onlar\u0131n tetik\u00e7i\u015fi hain Dhkpc’lileri ve her t\u00fcrl\u00fc ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fc Allah’\u0131n izniyle T\u00fcrk milleti …<\/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-33865","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n