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
\u0130SMA\u0130L AT\u00c7EKEN BA\u015eVURUSU<\/p>\n
(Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2021\/17879)<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Karar Tarihi: 31\/10\/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
Yusuf \u015eevki HAKYEMEZ<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u0130rfan F\u0130DAN<\/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
H\u00fcseyin \u00d6zg\u00fcr SEV\u0130ML\u0130<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fvurucu<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
\u0130smail AT\u00c7EKEN<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130<\/p>\n
1. Ba\u015fvuru; soru\u015fturma evresinde ba\u015fvurucunun g\u00f6zalt\u0131nda bulundu\u011fu s\u0131rada m\u00fcdafiiyle yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fmenin kolluk g\u00f6revlisi taraf\u0131ndan izlenmesi, g\u00f6zalt\u0131nda ve ceza infaz kurumunda belge al\u0131\u015fveri\u015finin s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 ve m\u00fcdafii ile ceza infaz kurumunda g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fememesi nedenleriyle m\u00fcdafi yard\u0131m\u0131ndan yararlanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n, duru\u015fmaya kat\u0131l\u0131m\u0131n\u0131n ses ve g\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fc aktar\u0131m\u0131 suretiyle sa\u011flanmas\u0131 nedeniyle de duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddialar\u0131na ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
A. Bireysel Ba\u015fvuru S\u00fcreci<\/p>\n
2. K\u0131r\u0131kkale Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 (Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k) ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda, Fetullah\u00e7\u0131 Ter\u00f6r \u00d6rg\u00fct\u00fc\/Paralel Devlet Yap\u0131lanmas\u0131 (FET\u00d6\/PDY) \u00fcye olma su\u00e7undan soru\u015fturma ba\u015flatm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu soru\u015fturma kapsam\u0131nda yakalanan ba\u015fvurucunun talebi \u00fczerine ayn\u0131 tarihte K\u0131r\u0131kkale Barosu taraf\u0131ndan g\u00f6revlendirilen Av. A.U. ba\u015fvurucunun kollukta al\u0131nan ifadesi s\u0131ras\u0131nda haz\u0131r bulunmu\u015ftur. 27\/12\/2018 tarihli \u015e\u00fcpheli – M\u00fcdafi G\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fme Tutana\u011f\u0131’nda; ba\u015fvurucunun ifadesinin al\u0131nmas\u0131ndan \u00f6nce m\u00fcdafii ile yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fme s\u0131ras\u0131nda herhangi bir g\u00f6revlinin ba\u015fvurucu ile m\u00fcdafiinin yan\u0131nda bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fmenin kimse taraf\u0131ndan dinlenilmedi\u011fi, g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fme s\u00fcresi ve mahremiyetinin ihlal edilmedi\u011fi belirtilmi\u015f, an\u0131lan tutanak kolluk g\u00f6revlilerinin yan\u0131 s\u0131ra ba\u015fvurucu ve m\u00fcdafii taraf\u0131ndan da imzalanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
3. Ba\u015fvurucunun Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131kta al\u0131nan ifadesinde ve tutuklanma talebi \u00fczerine yap\u0131lan sorgusunda da ayn\u0131 m\u00fcdafii haz\u0131r bulunmu\u015f, ba\u015fvurucu ya da m\u00fcdafii bu ifadelerinde m\u00fcdafii ile belge al\u0131\u015fveri\u015finin s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131na veya an\u0131lan tutanakta yer alan hususlara dair itiraz ileri s\u00fcrmemi\u015ftir. Sorgusunun ard\u0131ndan ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda adli kontrol tedbirleri uygulanmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
4. Ba\u015fvurucu, soru\u015fturma evresindeki adl\u00ee i\u015flemlere baro taraf\u0131ndan g\u00f6revlendirilen m\u00fcdafii olarak kat\u0131lan Av. A.U.yu Kayseri 9. Noterli\u011finin 31\/12\/2018 tarihli vek\u00e2letnamesi uyar\u0131nca m\u00fcdafii olarak tayin etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
5. Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k 4\/1\/2019 tarihinde ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda FET\u00d6\/PDY’ye \u00fcye olma su\u00e7unu i\u015fledi\u011fi iddias\u0131yla iddianame d\u00fczenlemi\u015ftir. An\u0131lan iddianamede yer verilen ve ba\u015fvurucu aleyhine beyanda bulunan tan\u0131k M.K.n\u0131n ifadesi ile ba\u015fvurucunun ByLock program\u0131n\u0131 kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair tespite dayal\u0131 olarak at\u0131l\u0131 su\u00e7u i\u015fledi\u011fi kanaatine var\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
6. K\u0131r\u0131kkale 2. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesi (Mahkeme) 8\/1\/2019 tarihinde duru\u015fma haz\u0131rl\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u015flemleri yapm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Tensip Tutana\u011f\u0131’nda ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda yakalama emri d\u00fczenlenmesine, -di\u011ferlerinin yan\u0131 s\u0131ra- ba\u015fvurucunun kullan\u0131m\u0131ndaki GSM hatt\u0131na dair HTS ve IMEI kay\u0131tlar\u0131n\u0131n Bilgi Teknolojileri ve \u0130leti\u015fim Kurumundan (BTK) temin edilerek bu kay\u0131tlar \u00fczerine bilirki\u015fi incelemesi yapt\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na ve iddianamede ad\u0131 ge\u00e7en M.K.n\u0131n istinabe yoluyla tan\u0131k s\u0131fat\u0131yla ifadesinin al\u0131nmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
7. Ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131ndaki duru\u015fma 3 celsede tamamlanm\u0131\u015f, ba\u015fvurucunun t\u00fcm celselere kat\u0131l\u0131m\u0131 ses ve g\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fc aktar\u0131m\u0131 (SEGB\u0130S) arac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131yla sa\u011flanm\u0131\u015f ve bu celselerde ba\u015fvurucunun m\u00fcdafii A.U. da haz\u0131r bulunmu\u015ftur. Mahkemece d\u00fczenlenen yakalama emri \u00fczerine ba\u015fvurucunun Tensip Tutana\u011f\u0131’nda kararla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lan celse tarihinden \u00f6nce Kayseri’de yakalanmas\u0131 ve Kayseri 5. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesinin SEGB\u0130S salonunda haz\u0131r edilmesi \u00fczerine Mahkemece 29\/1\/2019 tarihinde duru\u015fma a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucu, bu celsede savunmas\u0131n\u0131 m\u00fcdafii huzurunda yapaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 beyan etmi\u015f ve kendisine okunan iddianameye kar\u015f\u0131 savunmas\u0131n\u0131 yapm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucu celse sonunda at\u0131l\u0131 su\u00e7tan tutuklanarak Kayseri 2 No.lu T Tipi Kapal\u0131 Ceza \u0130nfaz Kurumuna (\u0130nfaz Kurumu) al\u0131nm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
8. Ba\u015fvurucu m\u00fcdafii 5\/2\/2019 tarihli dilek\u00e7esiyle ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda iddianamede yer verilen delillere y\u00f6nelik itirazlar\u0131n\u0131 dile getirerek tutuklama karar\u0131na itiraz etmi\u015f, bu talep reddedilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
9. Yarg\u0131laman\u0131n 13\/3\/2019 tarihli ikinci celsesinde, duru\u015fma haz\u0131rl\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u015flemleri s\u0131ras\u0131nda Mahkemece \u00e7e\u015fitli kurumlara g\u00f6nderilen m\u00fczekkerelerin cevaplar\u0131na dair yaz\u0131lar, tan\u0131k M.K.n\u0131n istinabe yoluyla al\u0131nan ifadesi ile BTK kay\u0131tlar\u0131na dair d\u00fczenlenen bilirki\u015fi raporu okunmu\u015f, ba\u015fvurucu ve m\u00fcdafii bu belgelere kar\u015f\u0131 itirazlar\u0131 dile getirilmi\u015ftir. An\u0131lan celsede Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k esas hakk\u0131ndaki m\u00fctalaas\u0131n\u0131 da sunmu\u015f ve ba\u015fvurucu m\u00fcdafii m\u00fctalaaya kar\u015f\u0131 savunma haz\u0131rlayabilmek i\u00e7in s\u00fcre talebinde bulunmu\u015ftur. Celse sonunda ba\u015fvurucu ve m\u00fcdafiine m\u00fctalaaya kar\u015f\u0131 beyanda bulunmak \u00fczere s\u00fcre verilmesine karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
10. Ba\u015fvurucu m\u00fcdafii, son celseden \u00f6nce esas hakk\u0131ndaki m\u00fctalaaya kar\u015f\u0131 kendisinin ve ba\u015fvurucunun savunmalar\u0131n\u0131 i\u00e7eren dilek\u00e7eleri Mahkemeye sunmu\u015ftur. Bu dilek\u00e7elerde muhakeme s\u00fcrecinde toplanan delillere dair itirazlar dile getirilmekle birlikte, ba\u015fvurucunun soru\u015fturma evresinde m\u00fcdafii ile g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fmesinin g\u00f6revliler taraf\u0131ndan izlendi\u011fine, tutuklu bulundu\u011fu \u0130nfaz Kurumunda m\u00fcdafii ile g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015femedi\u011fine, g\u00f6zalt\u0131nda ve tutuklu bulundu\u011fu s\u0131rada m\u00fcdafii ile belge al\u0131\u015fveri\u015finin s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131na veya duru\u015fmalara kat\u0131l\u0131m\u0131n\u0131n r\u0131zas\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131 olarak SEGB\u0130S arac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131yla sa\u011fland\u0131\u011f\u0131na y\u00f6nelik herhangi bir itiraz ileri s\u00fcrmemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
11. Ba\u015fvurucu ve m\u00fcdafii an\u0131lan dilek\u00e7elerde dile getirdikleri itirazlar\u0131 15\/5\/2019 tarihli son celsede de tekrar etmi\u015f, yarg\u0131lama sonucunda Mahkeme ba\u015fvurucunun at\u0131l\u0131 su\u00e7tan5 y\u0131l 27 ay 15 g\u00fcn hapis cezas\u0131yla cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
12. Ba\u015fvurucunun Mahkemeye sundu\u011fu 21\/5\/2019 tarihli dilek\u00e7ede \u0130nfaz Kurumu ile yarg\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131 Mahkemenin farkl\u0131 illerde bulundu\u011funu, yarg\u0131lama s\u0131ras\u0131nda m\u00fcdafii ile y\u00fcz y\u00fcze g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015femedi\u011fini ve yarg\u0131laman\u0131n k\u0131sa s\u00fcrede tamamland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 beyan ederek dosya suretinin kendisine g\u00f6nderilmesini talep etmesi \u00fczerine Mahkeme dosya suretini ba\u015fvurucuya UYAP \u00fczerinden g\u00f6ndermi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu ve m\u00fcdafii Mahkeme karar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 istinaf kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurmu\u015ftur. Ba\u015fvurucu m\u00fcdafii istinaf dilek\u00e7esinde mahk\u00fbmiyete esas al\u0131nan delillere dair itirazlar\u0131n\u0131 dile getirmi\u015f, ba\u015fvurucu ise benzer itirazlar\u0131n yan\u0131 s\u0131ra duru\u015fmalara bizzat kat\u0131labilmesi i\u00e7in Mahkemeye yak\u0131n bir ceza infaz kurumuna nakledilmesini talep etti\u011fini ancak t\u00fcm celselere kat\u0131l\u0131m\u0131n\u0131n SEGB\u0130S arac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131yla sa\u011fland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 beyan etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
13. Ankara B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 4. Ceza Dairesi (Daire) 23\/1\/2019 tarihinde istinaf kanun yoluna ba\u015fvuru taleplerinin esastan reddine karar vermi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu ve m\u00fcdafii Daire karar\u0131na Mahkeme karar\u0131na dayanak olan delillere ve duru\u015fmalara kat\u0131l\u0131m\u0131n SEGB\u0130S arac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131yla yap\u0131lmas\u0131na y\u00f6nelik itirazlar\u0131n\u0131 dile getirerek temyiz kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurmu\u015ftur. Ba\u015fvurucu temyiz dilek\u00e7esinde buna ek olarak tutuklu bulundu\u011fu \u0130nfaz Kurumunun Mahkemeden farkl\u0131 ilde yer almas\u0131 nedeniyle m\u00fcdafii ile yarg\u0131lama s\u0131ras\u0131nda fiilen bir arada bulunamamas\u0131 nedeniyle m\u00fcdafii yard\u0131m\u0131ndan yararlanamad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 da dile getirmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
14. Yarg\u0131tay (Kapat\u0131lan) 16. Ceza Dairesi 14\/10\/2020 tarihinde ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131ndaki temel cezan\u0131n hatal\u0131 olarak hesapland\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle Mahkemece 5 y\u0131l 27 ay 15 g\u00fcn olarak belirlenen cezan\u0131n 6 y\u0131l 15 ay g\u00fcn g\u00fcn olarak d\u00fczeltilmesi suretiyle h\u00fckm\u00fcn onanmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
15. Ba\u015fvurucu nihai karar\u0131 22\/2\/2021 tarihinde \u00f6\u011frendikten sonra 3\/3\/2021 tarihinde bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
16. Komisyon; adli yard\u0131m talebinin kabul\u00fcne ve duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunma ve m\u00fcdafi yard\u0131m\u0131ndan yararlanma haklar\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki iddialar\u0131n kabul edilemez oldu\u011funa, an\u0131lan \u015fik\u00e2yetlerin kabul edilebilirlik incelemesinin B\u00f6l\u00fcm taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
B. Bireysel Ba\u015fvuru Sonras\u0131 S\u00fcre\u00e7<\/p>\n
17. Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n 18\/2\/2021 tarihinde, ba\u015fvurucu aleyhine temyiz kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 h\u00e2lde ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131ndaki cezan\u0131n aleyhe de\u011fi\u015ftirilmesinin hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011fu gerek\u00e7esiyle onama karar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 4\/12\/2004 tarihli ve 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 Ceza Muhakemesi Kanunu\u2019nun 308. maddesi uyar\u0131nca itiraz talebinde bulunmu\u015ftur. Bu talep \u00fczerine (kapat\u0131lan) Yarg\u0131tay 16. Ceza Dairesi 1\/6\/2021 tarihinde itiraz talebini kabul ederek karar\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na ve \u015fu gerek\u00e7eyle d\u00fczeltilerek onanmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir:<\/p>\n
“Tayin edilen temel cezadan 3713 say\u0131l\u0131 Ter\u00f6rle M\u00fccadele Kanununun 5. maddesi uyar\u0131nca art\u0131r\u0131m yap\u0131l\u0131rken 3713 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanunun 5. maddesinin 1. f\u0131kras\u0131 uyar\u0131nca art\u0131r\u0131m yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n belirtilmesi gerekti\u011fi g\u00f6zetilmeden uygulama maddesinin yaln\u0131zca 3713 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanunun 5. maddesi olarak g\u00f6sterilmesiyle yetinilmesi,<\/p>\n
Bozmay\u0131 gerektirmi\u015f, san\u0131k ve m\u00fcdafiinin temyiz itirazlar\u0131 bu itibarla yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015f oldu\u011fundan h\u00fckm\u00fcn bu sebepten dolay\u0131 BOZULMASINA, ancak yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gerektirmeyen bu hususun CMK\u2019n\u0131n 303. maddesi uyar\u0131nca d\u00fczeltilmesi m\u00fcmk\u00fcn bulundu\u011fundan, h\u00fckm\u00fcn ikinci paragraf\u0131nda yer alan ‘3713 say\u0131l\u0131 yasan\u0131n 5. maddesi gere\u011fince’ ibaresinin \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131larak yerine ‘3713 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanunun 5. maddesinin 1. f\u0131kras\u0131 gere\u011fince’ ibaresinin yaz\u0131lmas\u0131 suretiyle sair y\u00f6nleri usul ve kanuna uygun bulunan h\u00fckm\u00fcn D\u00dcZELT\u0130LEREK ONANMASINA” <\/p>\n
II. DE\u011eERLEND\u0130RME<\/p>\n
A. Duru\u015fmada Haz\u0131r Bulunma Hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130hlal Edildi\u011fine \u0130li\u015fkin \u0130ddia<\/p>\n
18. Ba\u015fvurucu; duru\u015fmalara fiziken kat\u0131lmak istedi\u011fini belirtmi\u015f olmas\u0131na ra\u011fmen talebinin Mahkemece dikkate al\u0131nmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, t\u00fcm duru\u015fmalara SEGB\u0130S vas\u0131tas\u0131yla uzaktan kat\u0131lmak zorunda b\u0131rak\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirterek adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
19. Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 (Bakanl\u0131k) g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnde; duru\u015fma tutanaklar\u0131na g\u00f6re ba\u015fvurucunun SEGB\u0130S arac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131yla kat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 duru\u015fmalarda m\u00fcdafii yard\u0131m\u0131ndan da yararlanarak talep ve beyanlar\u0131n\u0131 sorunsuz bir \u015fekilde dile getirdi\u011fi, yarg\u0131lama SEGB\u0130S arac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131yla ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirmi\u015fse de lehine hususlar\u0131 ileri s\u00fcrme ve beyanda bulunma olana\u011f\u0131na sahip oldu\u011fu vurgulanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ayr\u0131ca ba\u015fvurucunun herhangi bir s\u0131n\u0131rlamaya maruz kalmadan ve teknik bir ba\u011flant\u0131 sorunu ya\u015famadan etkili \u015fekilde savunma yapma imk\u00e2n\u0131 buldu\u011fu, yarg\u0131laman\u0131n SEGB\u0130S yoluyla yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131n\u0131n yarg\u0131lanman\u0131n makul bir s\u00fcre i\u00e7erisinde sonu\u00e7land\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 amac\u0131n\u0131 da sa\u011flad\u0131\u011f\u0131 belirtilmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu, Bakanl\u0131k g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne kar\u015f\u0131 beyan\u0131nda bireysel ba\u015fvuru formunda dile getirdi\u011fi itirazlar\u0131n\u0131 yinelemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
20. Anayasa Mahkemesi \u015eehrivan \u00c7oban ([GK], B. No: 2017\/22672, 6\/2\/2020) ve Emrah Yayla ([GK], B. No: 2017\/38732, 6\/2\/2020) kararlar\u0131nda duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunma hakk\u0131 ile ilgili ilkeleri belirlemi\u015ftir. Anayasa Mahkemesi bu kararlarda \u00f6ncelikle ki\u015filerin talebine ayk\u0131r\u0131 olarak SEGB\u0130S yoluyla duru\u015fmaya kat\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunma hakk\u0131na y\u00f6nelik bir m\u00fcdahale te\u015fkil etti\u011fini tespit etmi\u015ftir. Bu m\u00fcdahalenin kanunilik, me\u015fru ama\u00e7 ve \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcl\u00fcl\u00fck y\u00f6n\u00fcnden incelenece\u011fini ifade etmi\u015ftir. An\u0131lan kararlarda 4\/12\/2004 tarihli ve 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 Ceza Muhakemesi Kanunu’nun 196. maddesinin kanunilik \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fc kar\u015f\u0131lad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve m\u00fcdahalenin usul ekonomisinin ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilmesine y\u00f6nelik me\u015fru bir amaca dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131 sonucuna ula\u015fm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r (\u015eehrivan \u00c7oban, \u00a7\u00a7 72-104; Emrah Yayla, \u00a7\u00a7 58-86).<\/p>\n
21. An\u0131lan kararlarda \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcl\u00fcl\u00fck y\u00f6n\u00fcnden yap\u0131lan incelemede ise ba\u015fvurucunun duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunma talebinin hangi zorlay\u0131c\u0131 nedene dayan\u0131larak kabul edilmedi\u011finin ortaya konulmamas\u0131 ve ba\u015fvurucunun SEGB\u0130S yoluyla kat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 celselerde esasl\u0131 i\u015flemlerin yap\u0131lmas\u0131 nedeniyle m\u00fcdahalenin gerekli olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 de\u011ferlendirilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
22. \u00d6te yandan Anayasa Mahkemesi daha \u00f6nce adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 g\u00fcvencelerinden a\u00e7\u0131k veya \u00f6rt\u00fcl\u00fc \u015fekilde feragat edilmesinin m\u00fcmk\u00fcn oldu\u011funu belirterek feragatin Anayasa’ya uygun kabul edilebilmesi i\u00e7in feragat iradesinin a\u00e7\u0131k ve sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ki\u015fi y\u00f6n\u00fcnden makul olarak \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclebilir olmas\u0131n\u0131n gerekti\u011fini belirtmi\u015ftir. Buna ek olarak asgari usul g\u00fcvencelerinin sa\u011flanm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131, ayr\u0131ca adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131ndan feragat edilmesini me\u015fru olmaktan \u00e7\u0131karan \u00fcst\u00fcn bir kamu yarar\u0131n\u0131n da bulunmamas\u0131 gerekir (Nurettin Balta, B. No: 2016\/10023, 28\/12\/2021, \u00a7 45). \u00d6rt\u00fcl\u00fc feragatin hangi durumlarda Anayasa’ya uygun kabul edilece\u011fine ili\u015fkin ilkeler genel olarak Ansar Onat (B. No: 2019\/14515, 15\/6\/2022) karar\u0131nda belirtilmi\u015ftir. Buna g\u00f6re \u00f6rt\u00fcl\u00fc feragatin ge\u00e7erli olabilmesi i\u00e7in feragat eden taraf\u0131n s\u00f6z konusu eylemlerinin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 makul olarak \u00f6ng\u00f6rebilece\u011fi ortaya konulmal\u0131d\u0131r. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla yetkili yarg\u0131 organlar\u0131 bu konuda varsay\u0131ma dayal\u0131 bir de\u011ferlendirme yapmamal\u0131d\u0131r (duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunma hakk\u0131 bak\u0131m\u0131ndan yap\u0131lan benzer de\u011ferlendirmeler i\u00e7in bkz. Emrah Yayla, \u00a7 75). Bununla birlikte adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 g\u00fcvencelerinden feragat iradesi, bunu g\u00f6steren olgular\u0131n bulunmas\u0131ndan veya su\u00e7 isnad\u0131 alt\u0131ndaki ki\u015finin tutum ve davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131ndan anla\u015f\u0131labilir (Ansar Onat \u00a7 21).<\/p>\n
23. Somut olayda duru\u015fma \u00fc\u00e7 celsede tamamlanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucu, duru\u015fman\u0131n t\u00fcm celselerine SEGB\u0130S arac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 ile kat\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucunun do\u011frudan duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunma hakk\u0131ndan feragat etti\u011fine dair bir beyan\u0131 bulunmamakta ise de talebine ayk\u0131r\u0131 olarak SEGB\u0130S yoluyla duru\u015fmaya kat\u0131lmak zorunda b\u0131rak\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 s\u00f6ylemek de m\u00fcmk\u00fcn g\u00f6z\u00fckmemektedir. Zira duru\u015fmalara SEGB\u0130S arac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 ile kat\u0131lan ba\u015fvurucu, bu duruma y\u00f6nelik herhangi bir itiraz ileri s\u00fcrmedi\u011fi gibi, her ne kadar bireysel ba\u015fvuru formunda duru\u015fmalara bizzat kat\u0131l\u0131m\u0131n\u0131n sa\u011flanmas\u0131 i\u00e7in Mahkemenin yarg\u0131 \u00e7evresinde bulunan ba\u015fka bir ceza infaz kurumuna nakledilmesini ilk celsede talep etti\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015fse de t\u00fcm celselere ili\u015fkin duru\u015fma tutanaklar\u0131na g\u00f6re ba\u015fvurucunun bu y\u00f6nde bir talepte bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 (bkz. \u00a7\u00a7 7-11), bu talebi ilk kez istinaf ba\u015fvuru dilek\u00e7esinde dile getirdi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r (bkz. \u00a7 12). Yine duru\u015fmaya uzaktan kat\u0131l\u0131m s\u00fcrecinde ses ve g\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fc kalitesiyle ilgili sorun ya\u015fand\u0131\u011f\u0131na ili\u015fkin bir iddia ve itiraza, duru\u015fma tutana\u011f\u0131 ve ba\u015fvuru formunda da yer verilmemi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucunun duru\u015fmaya bizzat kat\u0131lma talebini celse aralar\u0131nda da Mahkemeye iletmemesi dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda s\u00f6z konusu hakka ili\u015fkin feragat etme iradesini z\u0131mnen ortaya koydu\u011fu a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r. Ayr\u0131ca ba\u015fvurucunun SEGB\u0130S arac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 ile duru\u015fmaya kat\u0131l\u0131m\u0131n\u0131n sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 makul olarak \u00f6ng\u00f6rebilecek durumda olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair somut bir veri bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunma hakk\u0131ndan feragatle ilgili asgari usul g\u00fcvencelerinin kendisine sa\u011flanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na y\u00f6nelik bir iddias\u0131 da ba\u015fvuru formuna yans\u0131mam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Buna ek olarak ba\u015fvurucunun duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunma hakk\u0131ndan feragat etme iradesini g\u00f6sterdi\u011fine ili\u015fkin kabul\u00fc me\u015fru olmaktan \u00e7\u0131karacak \u00fcst\u00fcn bir kamu yarar\u0131n\u0131n mevcut oldu\u011fundan s\u00f6z etmek de somut olay\u0131n \u015fartlar\u0131nda m\u00fcmk\u00fcn g\u00f6z\u00fckmemektedir. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla ba\u015fvurucunun duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunma hakk\u0131na bir m\u00fcdahalede bulunulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 sonucuna var\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
24. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle ba\u015fvurunun bu k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a dayanaktan yoksun olmas\u0131 nedeniyle kabul edilemez oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
B. M\u00fcdafiden Yararlanma Hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130hlal Edildi\u011fine \u0130li\u015fkin \u0130ddialar<\/p>\n
1. G\u00f6zalt\u0131nda M\u00fcdafi ile Yap\u0131lan G\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fmenin Kolluk G\u00f6revlisi Taraf\u0131ndan \u0130zlendi\u011fine, G\u00f6zalt\u0131nda ve \u0130nfaz Kurumunda Belge Al\u0131\u015fveri\u015finin S\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131na \u0130li\u015fkin \u0130ddialar Y\u00f6n\u00fcnden <\/p>\n
25. Ba\u015fvurucu; g\u00f6zalt\u0131ndayken m\u00fcdafii ile yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fmenin kolluk g\u00f6revlisi taraf\u0131ndan izlendi\u011fini, g\u00f6zalt\u0131nda ve tutukland\u0131ktan sonra \u0130nfaz Kurumunda bulundu\u011fu s\u0131rada m\u00fcdafii ile dava dosyas\u0131na ili\u015fkin belge al\u0131\u015fveri\u015finin s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirterek m\u00fcdafi yard\u0131m\u0131ndan yararlanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
26. Bakanl\u0131k g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnde; ba\u015fvurucunun ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc h\u00e2l d\u00f6neminin son bulmas\u0131ndan sonraki tarihte yakaland\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve bu tarihte avukatlar\u0131n dosyaya eri\u015fimlerini k\u0131s\u0131tlayan bir d\u00fczenlemenin bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, soru\u015fturma evresinde m\u00fcdafinin dosyada belge almas\u0131n\u0131n k\u0131s\u0131tlanmas\u0131na dair karar da al\u0131nmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, dolay\u0131s\u0131yla ba\u015fvurucunun bu y\u00f6ndeki iddias\u0131n\u0131 destekleyen bir olgunun bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 belirtilmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu, Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131n bu konudaki g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne kar\u015f\u0131 beyanda bulunmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
27. 30\/3\/2011 tarihli ve 6216 say\u0131l\u0131 Anayasa Mahkemesinin Kurulu\u015fu ve Yarg\u0131lama Usulleri Hakk\u0131nda Kanun’un 45. maddesinin (2) numaral\u0131 f\u0131kras\u0131 uyar\u0131nca bireysel ba\u015fvuru yoluna ba\u015fvurabilmek i\u00e7in ola\u011fan kanun yollar\u0131n\u0131n t\u00fcketilmi\u015f olmas\u0131 gerekir (Ay\u015fe Z\u0131raman ve Cennet Ye\u015filyurt, B. No: 2012\/403, 26\/3\/2013, \u00a7 16).<\/p>\n
28. Somut olayda ba\u015fvurucunun, an\u0131lan itirazlar\u0131n\u0131 istinaf ve temyiz kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurular\u0131na dair dilek\u00e7elerinde ileri s\u00fcrmedi\u011fi, dolay\u0131s\u0131yla an\u0131lan iddialar\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcrebilece\u011fi ola\u011fan kanun yollar\u0131n\u0131 t\u00fcketmeksizin bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulundu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
29. A\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenlerle, ba\u015fvurunun bu k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015fvuru yollar\u0131n\u0131n t\u00fcketilmemesi nedeniyle kabul edilemez oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
2. Duru\u015fmalar S\u0131ras\u0131nda M\u00fcdafii ile Yan Yana Bulunulamad\u0131\u011f\u0131na ve Yarg\u0131lama Boyunca \u0130nfaz Kurumunda M\u00fcdafii ile G\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fclemedi\u011fine Dair \u0130ddialar Y\u00f6n\u00fcnden<\/p>\n
30. Ba\u015fvurucu; Mahkemenin yarg\u0131 \u00e7evresi d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki \u0130nfaz Kurumunda tutuklu olmas\u0131 nedeniyle duru\u015fmalar s\u0131ras\u0131nda m\u00fcdafii ile yan yana gelemedi\u011fini ve m\u00fcdafiinin \u0130nfaz Kurumuna gelmemesi nedeniyle onunla g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fme yapamad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirterek m\u00fcdafi yard\u0131m\u0131ndan yararlanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
31. Bakanl\u0131k g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnde; ba\u015fvurucunun yakaland\u0131\u011f\u0131 andan itibaren ve savunmalar\u0131n\u0131n al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 t\u00fcm adl\u00ee i\u015flemler s\u0131ras\u0131nda m\u00fcdafiinin haz\u0131r bulundu\u011fu, ba\u015fvurucu taraf\u0131ndan vekaletnameyle de m\u00fcdafii olarak tayin edilen bu m\u00fcdafiinin talebi \u00fczerine Mahkemece esas hakk\u0131ndaki m\u00fctalaaya kar\u015f\u0131 beyanda bulunabilmesi i\u00e7in kendisine s\u00fcre verildi\u011fi ve m\u00fcdafiinin yarg\u0131lama s\u0131ras\u0131nda savunma dilek\u00e7esi de sunarak delillere kar\u015f\u0131 itirazlar\u0131n\u0131 etkili \u015fekilde dile getirebildi\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu, Bakanl\u0131k g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne kar\u015f\u0131 beyan\u0131nda, farkl\u0131 bir ilde tutuklu bulunmas\u0131 ve yarg\u0131lamaya SEGB\u0130S arac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131yla kat\u0131lmas\u0131 nedeniyle m\u00fcdafi yard\u0131m\u0131ndan etkili \u015fekilde yararlanamad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 beyan etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
32. Anayasa Mahkemesi bir\u00e7ok karar\u0131nda, m\u00fcdafi yard\u0131m\u0131ndan yararlanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n hakkaniyete uygun yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6zel bir g\u00f6r\u00fcn\u00fcm\u00fc oldu\u011funu vurgulam\u0131\u015f (Yusuf Karaku\u015f ve di\u011ferleri, B. No: 2014\/12002, 8\/12\/2016, \u00a7 72; Orhan Patarya [GK], B. No: 2019\/42695, 20\/5\/2021, \u00a7 65) ve Anayasa’n\u0131n 36. maddesinin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131nda herkesin adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki m\u00fcdafi yard\u0131m\u0131ndan yararlanma hakk\u0131yla ilgili ilkeleri belirlemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
33. Buna g\u00f6re, \u015f\u00fcpheli ve san\u0131\u011fa salt savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n tan\u0131nmas\u0131 yeterli de\u011fildir. \u015e\u00fcpheli ve san\u0131\u011f\u0131n savunma i\u00e7in Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 36. maddesinde belirtilen me\u015fru vas\u0131ta ve yollardan yararland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 da gerekir. Savunmada ba\u015fvurulacak me\u015fru vas\u0131ta ve yollar aras\u0131nda avukatlar\u0131n teknik bilgilerinden ve tecr\u00fcbelerinden yararlanma olana\u011f\u0131 da bulunmaktad\u0131r. \u015e\u00fcpheli ve san\u0131k i\u00e7in Anayasa’n\u0131n 36. maddesinde s\u00f6z\u00fc edilen me\u015fru vas\u0131ta ve yollardan en \u00f6nemlisi m\u00fcdafi yard\u0131m\u0131ndan yararlanmakt\u0131r. Di\u011fer bir ifadeyle m\u00fcdafi yard\u0131m\u0131ndan yararlanma hakk\u0131, Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 36. maddesinde belirtilen me\u015fru vas\u0131ta ve yollar kavram\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndad\u0131r. Bu itibarla m\u00fcdafi yard\u0131m\u0131ndan yararlanman\u0131n adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n kapsam ve i\u00e7eri\u011fine d\u00e2hil ve bu hakk\u0131n do\u011fal sonucu oldu\u011fu ortaya \u00e7\u0131kmaktad\u0131r. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla su\u00e7 isnad\u0131 alt\u0131ndaki ki\u015fi, adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda kendisini bizzat savunma veya se\u00e7ece\u011fi bir m\u00fcdafinin yard\u0131m\u0131ndan yararlanma hakk\u0131na sahiptir (Yusuf Karaku\u015f ve di\u011ferleri, \u00a7 72).<\/p>\n
34. Adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki g\u00fcvencelere ili\u015fkin hak ihlallerinin bireysel ba\u015fvuruya konu olabilmesi i\u00e7in yarg\u0131laman\u0131n hakkaniyetinin zedelenecek olmas\u0131 ve bu ihlallerin yarg\u0131lama s\u00fcrecinin ileriki a\u015famalar\u0131nda telafi edilemeyecek nitelikte olmas\u0131 gerekir (baz\u0131 de\u011fi\u015fikliklerle birlikte bkz. Afitap Salman [GK], B. No: 2013\/2105, 11\/11\/2015, \u00a7 22). Bu kapsamda m\u00fcdafi yard\u0131m\u0131ndan yararlanma hakk\u0131 bak\u0131m\u0131ndan da \u00f6nemli olan, yarg\u0131lamaya bir b\u00fct\u00fcn olarak bak\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131nda \u015f\u00fcphelinin\/san\u0131\u011f\u0131n m\u00fcdafi yard\u0131m\u0131ndan etkili bir bi\u00e7imde yararlanm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131d\u0131r. Ancak avukata eri\u015fim y\u00f6n\u00fcnden getirilen k\u0131s\u0131tlama yarg\u0131laman\u0131n sonraki a\u015famalar\u0131nda telafi edilmi\u015f ise savunma hakk\u0131 ihlal edilmi\u015f say\u0131lmaz (baz\u0131 de\u011fi\u015fikliklerle birlikte bkz. Yusuf Karaku\u015f ve di\u011ferleri, \u00a7 78).<\/p>\n
35. Somut olayda ba\u015fvurucu, hakk\u0131nda silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7unu i\u015fledi\u011fi \u015f\u00fcphesiyle ba\u015flat\u0131lan soru\u015fturma kapsam\u0131nda K\u0131r\u0131kkale’de yakaland\u0131ktan sonra kolluk taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lan ifade alma i\u015flemine K\u0131r\u0131kkale Barosuna kay\u0131tl\u0131 olan A.U. m\u00fcdafi olarak kat\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu i\u015flem \u00f6ncesinde d\u00fczenlenen tutana\u011fa g\u00f6re, ba\u015fvurucunun ifadesinin al\u0131nmas\u0131ndan \u00f6nce m\u00fcdafii ile yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fme s\u0131ras\u0131nda yanlar\u0131nda herhangi bir g\u00f6revlinin bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fme kimse taraf\u0131ndan dinlenilmemi\u015f, g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fme s\u00fcresine ve mahremiyetine riayet edilmi\u015ftir (bkz. \u00a7 2). Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k taraf\u0131ndan al\u0131nan ifade ve H\u00e2kimlik\u00e7e yap\u0131lan sorgu i\u015flemlerine de ayn\u0131 m\u00fcdafi kat\u0131lm\u0131\u015f, ba\u015fvurucu ve m\u00fcdafi bu i\u015flemler s\u0131ras\u0131nda da an\u0131lan tutanakta yer verilen hususlar\u0131n aksini ileri s\u00fcrmemi\u015ftir (bkz. \u00a7 3).<\/p>\n
36. An\u0131lan m\u00fcdafii yarg\u0131laman\u0131n ba\u015flamas\u0131ndan \u00f6nce ba\u015fvurucu taraf\u0131ndan m\u00fcdafii olarak tayin edilmi\u015f ve yarg\u0131laman\u0131n t\u00fcm celselerinde bu m\u00fcdafii haz\u0131r bulunmu\u015ftur. Ba\u015fvurucu, t\u00fcm celselere SEGB\u0130S arac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131yla kat\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olmakla birlikte, ilk celsede haz\u0131r bulunan m\u00fcdafii huzurunda savunma yapaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 beyan ederek kendisine okunan iddianamedeki su\u00e7lamaya konu delillere kar\u015f\u0131 itirazlar\u0131n\u0131 dile getirmi\u015ftir. Dahas\u0131 ba\u015fvurucu duru\u015fmalar s\u0131ras\u0131nda beyanda bulunurken veya celse aras\u0131nda sunulan dilek\u00e7elerde, duru\u015fmada m\u00fcdafii ile yan yana gelemedi\u011fini ve kendisini \u0130nfaz Kurumunda ziyaret etmemesi nedeniyle m\u00fcdafii ile hi\u00e7bir \u015fekilde g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015femedi\u011fini ve konu\u015famad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 da ileri s\u00fcrmemi\u015ftir. Ayr\u0131ca ba\u015fvurucu m\u00fcdafii esas hakk\u0131ndaki m\u00fctalaaya kar\u015f\u0131 dile getirdi\u011fi itirazlar\u0131n\u0131 i\u00e7eren dilek\u00e7enin ekinde ba\u015fvurucunun kendi haz\u0131rlad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve ayn\u0131 husustaki savunmalar\u0131n\u0131 i\u00e7eren dilek\u00e7esini de Mahkemeye sundu\u011fu gibi ba\u015fvurucu ile birlikte istinaf ve kanun yollar\u0131na da ba\u015fvurmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
37. Di\u011fer yandan, ba\u015fvurucu ile -ba\u015fvurucunun tutuldu\u011fu \u0130nfaz Kurumunun bulundu\u011fu yere seyahat etmek suretiyle- g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fmesi m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olan m\u00fcdafinin bu g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fmeyi ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirmemesinin silahlar\u0131n e\u015fitli\u011fi ilkesine uygun olmayacak \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde savunmaya orant\u0131s\u0131z bir y\u00fck y\u00fckleme riski ta\u015f\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131 hususunda ku\u015fku bulunmamaktad\u0131r. Ancak kollu\u011fun ifade alma i\u015flemi \u00f6ncesinde ba\u015fvurucuya \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc bir \u015fahs\u0131n g\u00f6zetimi olmaks\u0131z\u0131n, bilgi al\u0131\u015fveri\u015finin gizlili\u011finin korunmas\u0131na y\u00f6nelik tedbirler de al\u0131narak ayn\u0131 yerde m\u00fcdafii ile g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fme imk\u00e2n\u0131 sa\u011flanmas\u0131, ba\u015fvurucunun yarg\u0131laman\u0131n ba\u015flamas\u0131ndan \u00f6nce vekil olarak da tayin etmek suretiyle kendi se\u00e7ti\u011fi m\u00fcdafiinin kat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 celselerde onunla duru\u015fma s\u0131ras\u0131nda yan yana gelemedi\u011fine veya \u0130nfaz Kurumunda da g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015femedi\u011fine dair herhangi bir itiraz ileri s\u00fcrmemesi, m\u00fcdafiinin esasl\u0131 i\u015flemlerin t\u00fcm\u00fcne kat\u0131l\u0131p kanun yolu ba\u015fvurular\u0131nda da bulunmas\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, -somut olay\u0131n \u00f6zel ko\u015fullar\u0131nda- ba\u015fvurucunun bir m\u00fcdafinin hukuki yard\u0131m\u0131ndan etkili bir \u015fekilde yararlanmas\u0131 i\u00e7in adli makamlar\u0131n gerekli m\u00fcdahalede bulunmad\u0131klar\u0131ndan ve bu konuda kendilerine d\u00fc\u015fen pozitif y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fcklerini yerine getirmediklerinden s\u00f6z etmek m\u00fcmk\u00fcn g\u00f6r\u00fcnmemektedir.<\/p>\n
38. 6216 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun\u2019un 48. maddesinin (2) numaral\u0131 f\u0131kras\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a dayanaktan yoksun ba\u015fvurular\u0131n Anayasa Mahkemesince kabul edilemezli\u011fine karar verilebilece\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir. Bu ba\u011flamda bir ihlal bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131k olan ba\u015fvurular a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a dayanaktan yoksun kabul edilebilir (Hikmet Balabano\u011flu, B. No: 2012\/1334, 17\/9\/2013, \u00a7 24).<\/p>\n
39. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle ba\u015fvurunun bu k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131n da a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a dayanaktan yoksun olmas\u0131 nedeniyle kabul edilemez oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
III. H\u00dcK\u00dcM<\/p>\n
A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle;<\/p>\n
A. 1. Duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a dayanaktan yoksun olmas\u0131 nedeniyle KABUL ED\u0130LEMEZ OLDU\u011eUNA,<\/p>\n
2. G\u00f6zalt\u0131nda m\u00fcdafi ile yap\u0131lan g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fmenin kolluk g\u00f6revlisi taraf\u0131ndan izlendi\u011fine, g\u00f6zalt\u0131nda ve infaz kurumunda belge al\u0131\u015fveri\u015finin s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131na ili\u015fkin iddialar y\u00f6n\u00fcnden m\u00fcdafi yard\u0131m\u0131ndan yararlanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n ba\u015fvuru yollar\u0131n\u0131n t\u00fcketilmemesi nedeniyle KABUL ED\u0130LEMEZ OLDU\u011eUNA,<\/p>\n
3. Duru\u015fmalar s\u0131ras\u0131nda m\u00fcdafii ile yan yana bulunulamad\u0131\u011f\u0131na ve yarg\u0131lama boyunca infaz kurumunda m\u00fcdafii ile g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fclemedi\u011fine dair iddialar y\u00f6n\u00fcnden m\u00fcdafi yard\u0131m\u0131ndan yararlanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a dayanaktan yoksun olmas\u0131 nedeniyle KABUL ED\u0130LEMEZ OLDU\u011eUNA,<\/p>\n
B. 12\/1\/2011 tarihli ve 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu’nun 339. maddesinin (2) numaral\u0131 f\u0131kras\u0131 uyar\u0131nca tahsil edilmesi ma\u011fduriyetine neden olaca\u011f\u0131ndan adli yard\u0131m talebi kabul edilen ba\u015fvurucunun yarg\u0131lama giderlerini \u00f6demekten TAMAMEN MUAF TUTULMASINA,<\/p>\n
C. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE 31\/10\/2024 tarihinde OYB\u0130RL\u0130\u011e\u0130YLE karar verildi.<\/p>\n
\u200bAnayasa Mahkemesi’nin 31\/10\/2024 tarihli ve 2021\/17879 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 \u0130SMA\u0130L AT\u00c7EKEN BA\u015eVURUSU (Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2021\/17879) \u00a0 Karar Tarihi: 31\/10\/2024 B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM \u00a0 KARAR \u00a0 \u00a0 Ba\u015fkan : Hasan Tahsin G\u00d6KCAN \u00dcyeler : Yusuf \u015eevki HAKYEMEZ \u00a0 \u00a0 \u0130rfan F\u0130DAN \u00a0 \u00a0 Muhterem \u0130NCE \u00a0 \u00a0 Y\u0131lmaz AK\u00c7\u0130L Raport\u00f6r : H\u00fcseyin \u00d6zg\u00fcr SEV\u0130ML\u0130 Ba\u015fvurucu : \u0130smail AT\u00c7EKEN \u00a0 I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130 1. Ba\u015fvuru; soru\u015fturma evresinde ba\u015fvurucunun g\u00f6zalt\u0131nda bulundu\u011fu s\u0131rada m\u00fcdafiiyle yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fmenin kolluk g\u00f6revlisi taraf\u0131ndan izlenmesi, g\u00f6zalt\u0131nda ve ceza infaz kurumunda belge al\u0131\u015fveri\u015finin s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 ve m\u00fcdafii ile ceza infaz kurumunda g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fememesi nedenleriyle m\u00fcdafi yard\u0131m\u0131ndan yararlanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n, duru\u015fmaya kat\u0131l\u0131m\u0131n\u0131n ses ve g\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fc aktar\u0131m\u0131 suretiyle sa\u011flanmas\u0131 nedeniyle de duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddialar\u0131na ili\u015fkindir. A. Bireysel Ba\u015fvuru S\u00fcreci 2. K\u0131r\u0131kkale Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 (Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k) ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda, Fetullah\u00e7\u0131 Ter\u00f6r \u00d6rg\u00fct\u00fc\/Paralel Devlet Yap\u0131lanmas\u0131 (FET\u00d6\/PDY) \u00fcye olma su\u00e7undan soru\u015fturma ba\u015flatm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu soru\u015fturma kapsam\u0131nda yakalanan ba\u015fvurucunun talebi \u00fczerine ayn\u0131 tarihte K\u0131r\u0131kkale Barosu taraf\u0131ndan g\u00f6revlendirilen Av. A.U. ba\u015fvurucunun kollukta al\u0131nan ifadesi s\u0131ras\u0131nda haz\u0131r bulunmu\u015ftur. 27\/12\/2018 tarihli \u015e\u00fcpheli – M\u00fcdafi G\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fme Tutana\u011f\u0131’nda; ba\u015fvurucunun ifadesinin al\u0131nmas\u0131ndan \u00f6nce m\u00fcdafii ile yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fme s\u0131ras\u0131nda herhangi bir g\u00f6revlinin ba\u015fvurucu ile m\u00fcdafiinin yan\u0131nda bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fmenin kimse taraf\u0131ndan dinlenilmedi\u011fi, g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fme s\u00fcresi ve mahremiyetinin ihlal edilmedi\u011fi belirtilmi\u015f, an\u0131lan tutanak kolluk g\u00f6revlilerinin yan\u0131 s\u0131ra …<\/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-21504","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber","category-uncategorized-tr"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n