T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CUMHUR\u0130YET\u0130<\/p>\n
ANAYASA MAHKEMES\u0130<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
GENEL KURUL<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
KARAR<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
AHMET ATA UZUNER BA\u015eVURUSU<\/p>\n
(Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2019\/2675)<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Karar Tarihi: 12\/12\/2024<\/p>\n
R.G. Tarih ve Say\u0131: 5\/5\/2025 – 32891<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
GENEL KURUL<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
KARAR<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fkan<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Kadir \u00d6ZKAYA<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fkanvekili<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Hasan Tahsin G\u00d6KCAN<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fkanvekili<\/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
Recai AKYEL<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Yusuf \u015eevki HAKYEMEZ<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Y\u0131ld\u0131z SEFER\u0130NO\u011eLU<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Selahaddin MENTE\u015e<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u0130rfan F\u0130DAN<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Kenan YA\u015eAR<\/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
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00d6mer \u00c7INAR<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Metin KIRATLI<\/p>\n
Raport\u00f6r<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Y\u00fccel ARSLAN<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fvurucu<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Ahmet Ata UZUNER<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
I. BA\u015eVURUNUN KONUSU<\/p>\n
1. Ba\u015fvuru, h\u00e2kimlik mesle\u011finden \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lan ki\u015finin noterli\u011fe atamas\u0131n\u0131n yap\u0131lmamas\u0131 nedeniyle \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
II. BA\u015eVURU S\u00dcREC\u0130<\/p>\n
2. Ba\u015fvurular 15\/1\/2019 ve 14\/3\/2019 tarihlerinde yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
3. 2019\/9133 numaral\u0131 ba\u015fvuru dosyas\u0131n\u0131n konu ve ki\u015fi y\u00f6n\u00fcnden hukuki irtibat\u0131 nedeniyle 2019\/2675 numaral\u0131 ba\u015fvuru dosyas\u0131 ile birle\u015ftirilmesine, incelemenin 2019\/2675 numaral\u0131 ba\u015fvuru dosyas\u0131 \u00fczerinden y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclmesine karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
4. Komisyon ba\u015fvurular\u0131n kabul edilebilirlik ve esas incelemesinin birlikte yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir. Birinci B\u00f6l\u00fcm, ba\u015fvurunun Genel Kurul taraf\u0131ndan incelenmesine karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
5. Ba\u015fvuru belgelerinin bir \u00f6rne\u011fi bilgi i\u00e7in Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na (Bakanl\u0131k) g\u00f6nderilmi\u015ftir. Bakanl\u0131k, g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fc bildirmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu, Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131n g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne kar\u015f\u0131 s\u00fcresinde beyanda bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
III. OLAY VE OLGULAR <\/p>\n
6. Ba\u015fvuru formu ve eklerinde ifade edildi\u011fi \u015fekliyle ve Ulusal Yarg\u0131 A\u011f\u0131 Bili\u015fim Sistemi (UYAP) arac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131yla eri\u015filen bilgi ve belgeler \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde olaylar \u00f6zetle \u015f\u00f6yledir:<\/p>\n
7. Ba\u015fvuruya konu olaylar\u0131n meydana geldi\u011fi s\u00fcre\u00e7teki ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc h\u00e2l (OHAL) \u015fartlar\u0131na, OHAL ilan\u0131na ve uygulanan tedbirlere ili\u015fkin genel bilgilere \u015e\u00fckran Da\u011f Cabir ([1. B.], B. No: 2019\/19839, 15\/3\/2023, \u00a7\u00a7 5-7) karar\u0131nda yer verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
8. Ba\u015fvurucu, h\u00e2kim olarak g\u00f6rev yapmakta iken 23\/7\/2016 tarihli ve 29779 say\u0131l\u0131 Resm\u00ee Gazete’de yay\u0131mlanan 667 say\u0131l\u0131 Ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc Hal Kapsam\u0131nda Al\u0131nan Tedbirlere \u0130li\u015fkin Kanun H\u00fckm\u00fcnde Kararname’nin 3. maddesinin (1) numaral\u0131 f\u0131kras\u0131 uyar\u0131nca H\u00e2kimler ve Savc\u0131lar Kurulunun 24\/8\/2016 tarihli ve 2016\/426 say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131 ile meslekten \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
9. Bakanl\u0131k Hukuk \u0130\u015fleri Genel M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc (Genel M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fck) 22\/4\/2017 tarihli ve 30046 say\u0131l\u0131 Resm\u00ee Gazete’de \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc s\u0131n\u0131f m\u00fcnhal noterliklere ili\u015fkin ilan yay\u0131mlam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucu 6049 say\u0131l\u0131 noterlik belgesi ile an\u0131lan ilan uyar\u0131nca noterlik ba\u015fvurusu yapm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucunun da talep etti\u011fi \u00c7obanlar Noterli\u011fine 6168 say\u0131l\u0131 belge sahibi atanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bunun \u00fczerine ba\u015fvurucu; noterlik belgesinin 6049 say\u0131l\u0131 oldu\u011funu, \u00f6nceki say\u0131l\u0131 belge uyar\u0131nca as\u0131l hak sahibi kendisi olmas\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131n alt s\u0131radaki belge sahibinin noterli\u011fe atanmas\u0131n\u0131n hatal\u0131 oldu\u011funu belirterek yanl\u0131\u015fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n d\u00fczeltilmesi ve \u00c7obanlar Noterli\u011fine atamas\u0131n\u0131n yap\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in Genel M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fckten talepte bulunmu\u015ftur. Ba\u015fvurucunun talebine cevap verilmemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
10. Genel M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fck 10\/6\/2017 tarihli ve 30092 say\u0131l\u0131 Resm\u00ee Gazete’de \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc s\u0131n\u0131f m\u00fcnhal noterliklere ili\u015fkin yeni bir ilan yay\u0131mlam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. An\u0131lan ilan uyar\u0131nca ba\u015fvurucunun da talep etti\u011fi K\u0131br\u0131s\u00e7\u0131k Noterli\u011fine alt s\u0131radaki 6782 say\u0131l\u0131 belge sahibi atanm\u0131\u015f ve ba\u015fvurucunun atamas\u0131 yap\u0131lmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
11. Ba\u015fvurucu; her iki Noterli\u011fe yap\u0131lan atamalar\u0131n iptali, maddi ve manevi tazminat talebi ile 2\/10\/2017 tarihinde idari yarg\u0131da dava a\u00e7m\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ankara 11. \u0130dare Mahkemesi (Mahkeme) iki atama i\u015fleminin farkl\u0131 hukuki irdelemelere tabi oldu\u011funu ve aralar\u0131nda hukuki veya maddi y\u00f6nden irtibat bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirterek iki i\u015flemin birlikte dava konusu edilemeyece\u011fi gerek\u00e7esiyle20\/10\/2017 tarihinde dilek\u00e7e ret karar\u0131 vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
12. Ba\u015fvurucu, bunun \u00fczerine her iki i\u015flemin iptali ile maddi ve manevi kay\u0131plar\u0131n\u0131n tazmini i\u00e7in ayr\u0131 ayr\u0131 dava a\u00e7m\u0131\u015f ve iki davada da y\u00fcr\u00fctmenin durdurulmas\u0131 talebinde bulunmu\u015ftur. Mahkeme, mevzuatta belirlenen \u015fartlar\u0131n ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmedi\u011fi gerek\u00e7esiyle iki davada da y\u00fcr\u00fctmenin durdurulmas\u0131 taleplerini reddetmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucunun bu kararlara kar\u015f\u0131 itirazlar\u0131 da reddedilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
13. Mahkeme 18\/1\/1972 tarihli ve 1512 say\u0131l\u0131 Noterlik Kanunu’nun noterlik staj\u0131na kabul \u015fartlar\u0131n\u0131n d\u00fczenlendi\u011fi 7. maddesine dayanarak davalar\u0131 24\/5\/2018 ve 10\/10\/2018 tarihlerinde esastan reddetmi\u015ftir. Kararlarda; an\u0131lan maddenin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n 6. bendinde kesinle\u015fmi\u015f bir ceza veya disiplin karar\u0131 sonucunda h\u00e2kim olma niteli\u011fini kaybetmi\u015f bulunmamak \u015fart\u0131na ikinci f\u0131kras\u0131nda ise ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fctleriyle iltisakl\u0131 veya irtibatl\u0131 olanlar\u0131n noterli\u011fe kabul edilmeyece\u011fine ili\u015fkin h\u00fckme yer verildi\u011fini belirtmi\u015ftir. Mahkeme; gerek\u00e7esinde, an\u0131lan mevzuata at\u0131fla ba\u015fvurucunun h\u00e2kim olarak g\u00f6rev yapmakta iken Fetullah\u00e7\u0131 Ter\u00f6r \u00d6rg\u00fct\u00fc\/Paralel Devlet Yap\u0131lanmas\u0131 (FET\u00d6\/PDY) \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc ile irtibat ve iltisak\u0131 oldu\u011fu gerek\u00e7esiyle meslekten \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, h\u00e2kimlik vasf\u0131n\u0131 kaybeden ve ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc ile iltisakl\u0131 oldu\u011fu de\u011ferlendirilen ba\u015fvurucunun noterlik mesle\u011fine kabul \u015fartlar\u0131n\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131mad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ifade etmi\u015ftir. Mahkeme bu gerek\u00e7eyle ba\u015fvurucunun noterli\u011fe atamas\u0131n\u0131n yap\u0131lmayarak alt s\u0131radaki belge sahiplerinin atamas\u0131n\u0131n yap\u0131lmas\u0131na ili\u015fkin i\u015flemlerde hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 sonucuna varm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
14. Ba\u015fvurucu, ret kararlar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 istinaf kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurmu\u015ftur. Ba\u015fvurucu; istinaf dilek\u00e7esinde, kesinle\u015fmi\u015f bir ceza mahk\u00fbmiyeti veya disiplin karar\u0131 bulunmaks\u0131z\u0131n meslekten \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan 1512 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 7. maddesinin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n (6) numaral\u0131 bendinin uygulanma olana\u011f\u0131 bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ifade etmi\u015ftir. Ayr\u0131ca meslekten \u00e7\u0131karma karar\u0131nda somut bir delil ya da olguya dayan\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, idarenin davaya cevap dilek\u00e7esinde ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcyle irtibat veya iltisakl\u0131 oldu\u011funa dair hi\u00e7bir somut delil g\u00f6sterilemedi\u011fini, hakk\u0131nda silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7undan y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclen soru\u015fturmada da somut bir delil ortaya konulamad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 vurgulam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. S\u0131rf meslekten \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131n\u0131n ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcyle irtibat veya iltisakl\u0131 oldu\u011fu sonucunu do\u011furmayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcren ba\u015fvurucu, mahkeme kararlar\u0131n\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 ve davalar\u0131n kabul\u00fcn\u00fc talep etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
15. Ba\u015fvurucunun istinaf talepleri Ankara B\u00f6lge \u0130dare Mahkemesi 9. \u0130dari Dava Dairesince (Daire) 29\/11\/2018 ve 24\/1\/2019 tarihlerinde kesin olarak reddedilmi\u015ftir. Daire, kararlar\u0131nda Mahkemenin dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7elerin ve nedenlerin uygun g\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc, istinaf dilek\u00e7esinde ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclen iddialar\u0131n karar\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 gerektirecek nitelikte olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirtmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
16. Ba\u015fvurucu 15\/1\/2019 ve 14\/3\/2019 tarihlerinde bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
17. UYAP \u00fczerinden yap\u0131lan incelemede ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7undan y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclen kovu\u015fturmada her t\u00fcrl\u00fc \u015f\u00fcpheden uzak delil bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve ba\u015fvurucunun an\u0131lan su\u00e7u i\u015fledi\u011finin sabit olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle 22\/3\/2019 tarihinde beraat karar\u0131 verildi\u011fi tespit edilmi\u015ftir. Karar, istinaf edilmeyerek 10\/4\/2019 tarihinde kesinle\u015fmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
18. Ba\u015fvurucu, H\u00e2kimler ve Savc\u0131lar Kurulunun 15\/11\/2022 tarihli ve 2022\/2654 say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131yla hakk\u0131ndaki meslekten \u00e7\u0131karma karar\u0131 kald\u0131r\u0131larak g\u00f6reve iade edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
IV. \u0130LG\u0130L\u0130 HUKUK<\/p>\n
A. Ulusal Hukuk<\/p>\n
19. 22\/6\/2017 tarihli ve 30104 ikinci m\u00fckerrer say\u0131l\u0131 Resm\u00ee Gazete’de yay\u0131mlanan 691 say\u0131l\u0131 Ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc Hal Kapsam\u0131nda Baz\u0131 D\u00fczenlemeler Yap\u0131lmas\u0131 Hakk\u0131nda Kanun H\u00fckm\u00fcnde Kararname’nin (691 say\u0131l\u0131 KHK) 6. maddesi \u015f\u00f6yledir:<\/p>\n
\u00a0\u201c18\/1\/1972 tarihli ve 1512 say\u0131l\u0131 Noterlik Kanununun 7 nci maddesinin ikinci f\u0131kras\u0131na ‘olanlar’ ibaresinden sonra gelmek \u00fczere ‘ile ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fctleriyle iltisakl\u0131 veya irtibatl\u0131 bulunanlar’ ibaresi eklenmi\u015ftir.\u201d<\/p>\n
20. 691 say\u0131l\u0131 KHK’n\u0131n 6. maddesi 31\/1\/2018 tarihli ve 7069 say\u0131l\u0131 Ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc Hal Kapsam\u0131nda Baz\u0131 D\u00fczenlemeler Yap\u0131lmas\u0131 Hakk\u0131nda Kanun H\u00fckm\u00fcnde Kararnamenin De\u011fi\u015ftirilerek Kabul Edilmesine Dair Kanun’un 6. maddesi ile aynen kabul edilmi\u015ftir. De\u011fi\u015fiklik sonras\u0131 1512 say\u0131l\u0131 Noterlik Kanunu’nun 7. maddesinin ilgili k\u0131sm\u0131 \u015f\u00f6yledir:<\/p>\n
\u00a0\u201cMadde 7 \u2013 Noterlik staj\u0131na kabul edilebilmek i\u00e7in:<\/p>\n
…<\/p>\n
6. Kesinle\u015fmi\u015f bir ceza veya disiplin karar\u0131 sonucunda hakim, savc\u0131, memur yahut avukat olmak niteli\u011fini kaybetmi\u015f bulunmamak,<\/p>\n
…<\/p>\n
Noterlik staj\u0131na engel mahk\u00fbmiyeti olanlar ile ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fctleriyle iltisakl\u0131 veya irtibatl\u0131 bulunanlar, noterli\u011fe kabul edilemezler…\u201d<\/p>\n
21. Anayasa Mahkemesinin 14\/11\/2019 tarihli ve E.2018\/89, K.2019\/84 say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131n\u0131n ilgili k\u0131sm\u0131 \u015f\u00f6yledir:<\/p>\n
“32. Ola\u011fan d\u00f6nemde an\u0131lan ba\u011f\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131na y\u00f6nelik olarak yap\u0131lacak de\u011ferlendirmenin somut olgulara dayal\u0131 bir temele sahip bulunmas\u0131 esas\u0131n\u0131n benimsenmesi, kanunlar\u0131n Anayasa\u2019ya uygun olarak yorumlanmas\u0131 gere\u011finin do\u011fal bir sonucudur. Buna g\u00f6re kural uyar\u0131nca ancak noterlik mesle\u011fine al\u0131nmamas\u0131n\u0131 hakl\u0131 k\u0131lacak nitelikte olgusal temele sahip olan ba\u011flant\u0131lar\u0131n iltisak ve irtibat olarak de\u011ferlendirilmesi gerekti\u011fi a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r. Ku\u015fkusuz bu de\u011ferlendirme, her h\u00e2l\u00fck\u00e2rda cezai sorumlulu\u011fun bulunup bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z olarak sadece ki\u015finin noterlik g\u00f6revine al\u0131nmas\u0131n\u0131n uygun olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnde yap\u0131lacak bir incelemeden ibaret olacakt\u0131r. Bu kapsamdaki de\u011ferlendirme ise noterli\u011fe atama konusunda yetkili olan Bakanl\u0131k taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lacak olup s\u00f6z konusu de\u011ferlendirme s\u0131ras\u0131nda Bakanl\u0131k, kendisine yap\u0131lan bildirimlerle ba\u011fl\u0131 olmaks\u0131z\u0131n her t\u00fcrl\u00fc olay, olgu, bilgi ve bulguyu serbest\u00e7e g\u00f6zetecektir.<\/p>\n
…<\/p>\n
37. Ayr\u0131ca kural\u0131n uygulanmas\u0131ndan do\u011facak uyu\u015fmazl\u0131klar\u0131n yarg\u0131ya ta\u015f\u0131nabilmesi m\u00fcmk\u00fcnd\u00fcr. Bu kapsamda kural yarg\u0131 yoluna ba\u015fvurma g\u00fcvencesi bak\u0131m\u0131ndan herhangi bir s\u0131n\u0131rlama getirmedi\u011finden noterli\u011fe kabul edilmeyen bireylerin kural\u0131n \u00f6ng\u00f6rd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ko\u015fulun ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmedi\u011fi, bir ba\u015fka deyi\u015fle herhangi bir ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcyle iltisakl\u0131 veya irtibatl\u0131 bulunmad\u0131klar\u0131 iddias\u0131yla yarg\u0131 yoluna ba\u015fvurmalar\u0131nda ve yarg\u0131 yerlerince hakl\u0131 bulunmalar\u0131 h\u00e2linde noterli\u011fe girmelerinde bir engel bulunmamaktad\u0131r. Buna g\u00f6re Kanun\u2019da kural\u0131n amac\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda keyfi olarak kullan\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6nleyecek yasal g\u00fcvenceye yer verildi\u011finden kuralla ula\u015f\u0131lmak istenen amaca ili\u015fkin kamu yarar\u0131 ile bireyin kamu hizmetine girme hakk\u0131 aras\u0131nda bulunmas\u0131 gereken makul dengenin g\u00f6zetildi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r…”<\/p>\n
22. Dan\u0131\u015ftay Be\u015finci Dairesinin 10\/2\/2022 tarihli ve E.2017\/3615, K.2022\/397 say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131n\u0131n ilgili k\u0131sm\u0131 \u015f\u00f6yledir:<\/p>\n
“Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 139. maddesinde h\u00e2kim ve savc\u0131lar\u0131n g\u00f6revlerinin sona ermesi sonucunu do\u011furan i\u015flemler, disiplin cezalar\u0131 ve meslekte kalmalar\u0131n\u0131n uygun olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnde verilen kararlar olarak ikiye ayr\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. 24\/02\/1983 tarihli ve 2802 say\u0131l\u0131 Hakimler ve Savc\u0131lar Kanunu’nun ‘H\u00e2kimlik ve savc\u0131l\u0131k g\u00f6revlerinin sona ermesi’ kenar ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 53. maddesinde de disiplin cezas\u0131 niteli\u011findeki meslekten \u00e7\u0131karma i\u015flemi ile h\u00e2kimlik ve savc\u0131l\u0131k g\u00f6revinin sona ermesi sonucunu do\u011furan di\u011fer i\u015flemler ayr\u0131 ayr\u0131 belirtilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla 667 say\u0131l\u0131 KHK’n\u0131n 3. maddesi uyar\u0131nca h\u00e2kim ve savc\u0131lar\u0131n meslekte kalmalar\u0131n\u0131n uygun olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na ve meslekten \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131na ili\u015fkin kararlar\u0131n, bu ki\u015filere disiplin cezas\u0131 verilmesine ili\u015fkin kararlardan ayr\u0131 nitelikte oldu\u011fu konusunda duraksama bulunmamaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Dairemizin, Dan\u0131\u015ftay Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n internet sitesinde g\u00fcncel kararlar ba\u015fl\u0131\u011f\u0131 alt\u0131nda yay\u0131mlanm\u0131\u015f olan, 04\/10\/2016 tarih ve E:2016\/8196, K:2016\/4066 say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda da belirtilmi\u015f oldu\u011fu \u00fczere 667 say\u0131l\u0131 KHK’n\u0131n 3. maddesi uyar\u0131nca ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fctlerine veya MGK’ca Devletin mill\u00ee g\u00fcvenli\u011fine kar\u015f\u0131 faaliyette bulundu\u011funa karar verilen yap\u0131, olu\u015fum veya gruplara \u00fcyeli\u011fi, mensubiyeti veya iltisak\u0131 yahut bunlarla irtibat\u0131 oldu\u011fu de\u011ferlendirilen yarg\u0131 mensuplar\u0131n\u0131n, ‘meslekte kalmas\u0131n\u0131n uygun olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na ve meslekten \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131na’ ili\u015fkin kararlar, adli su\u00e7 veya disiplin su\u00e7u i\u015flenmesi kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131nda uygulanan yapt\u0131r\u0131mlardan farkl\u0131 olarak ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fctleri ile mill\u00ee g\u00fcvenli\u011fe kar\u015f\u0131 faaliyette bulundu\u011fu kabul edilen yap\u0131lar\u0131n kamu kurum ve kurulu\u015flar\u0131ndaki varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ortadan kald\u0131rmay\u0131 ama\u00e7layan ‘ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc tedbir’ niteli\u011findedir.”<\/p>\n
B. Uluslararas\u0131 Hukuk<\/p>\n
23. Avrupa \u0130nsan Haklar\u0131 S\u00f6zle\u015fmesi’nin (S\u00f6zle\u015fme) “\u00d6zel ve aile hayat\u0131na sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131” ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 8. maddesi \u015f\u00f6yledir:<\/p>\n
“(1) Herkes \u00f6zel ve aile hayat\u0131na, konutuna ve yaz\u0131\u015fmas\u0131na sayg\u0131 g\u00f6sterilmesi hakk\u0131na sahiptir.<\/p>\n
\u00a0(2) Bu hakk\u0131n kullan\u0131lmas\u0131na bir kamu makam\u0131n\u0131n m\u00fcdahalesi, ancak m\u00fcdahalenin yasayla \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015f ve demokratik bir toplumda ulusal g\u00fcvenlik, kamu g\u00fcvenli\u011fi, \u00fclkenin ekonomik refah\u0131, d\u00fczenin korunmas\u0131, su\u00e7 i\u015flenmesinin \u00f6nlenmesi, sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n veya ahlak\u0131n veya ba\u015fkalar\u0131n\u0131n hak ve \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fcklerinin korunmas\u0131 i\u00e7in gerekli bir tedbir olmas\u0131 durumunda s\u00f6z konusu olabilir.”<\/p>\n
24. Avrupa \u0130nsan Haklar\u0131 Mahkemesi (A\u0130HM) i\u00e7tihad\u0131nda \u00f6zel hayat\u0131n eksiksiz bir tan\u0131m\u0131 bulunmayan geni\u015f bir kavram oldu\u011funu belirtmektedir. \u00d6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131 alt kategorisinde ge\u00e7en \u00f6zel hayat kavram\u0131 A\u0130HM taraf\u0131ndan olduk\u00e7a geni\u015f yorumlanmakta ve bu kavrama ili\u015fkin olarak t\u00fcketici bir tan\u0131m yap\u0131lmaktan \u00f6zellikle ka\u00e7\u0131n\u0131lmaktad\u0131r (Koch\/Almanya, B. No: 497\/09, 19\/7\/2012, \u00a7 51). Bununla birlikte S\u00f6zle\u015fme’nin denetim organlar\u0131n\u0131n i\u00e7tihatlar\u0131nda bireyin ki\u015fili\u011fini serbest\u00e7e geli\u015ftirmesi ve ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirmesi ile ki\u015fisel ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131zl\u0131k kavramlar\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n kapsam\u0131n\u0131n belirlenmesinde temel al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r (Pretty\/Birle\u015fik Krall\u0131k, B. No: 2346\/02, 29\/4\/2002, \u00a7 61; Christine Goodwin\/Birle\u015fik Krall\u0131k [BD], B. No: 28957\/95, 11\/7\/2002, \u00a7 90; Sidabras ve D\u017eiautas\/Litvanya, B. No: 55480\/00, 59330\/00, 27\/7\/2004, \u00a7 43; K.A. ve A.D.\/Bel\u00e7ika, B. No: 42758\/98, 45558\/99, 17\/2\/2005, \u00a7 83).<\/p>\n
25. A\u0130HM, sonuca dayal\u0131 yakla\u015f\u0131m\u0131 uygulad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ba\u015fvurularda iddia edilen ihlallerin a\u011f\u0131rl\u0131k ve ciddiyet derecesini de\u011ferlendirmeye y\u00f6nelik k\u0131staslar olu\u015fturmu\u015ftur. Bu kapsamda ba\u015fvurucunun s\u00f6z konusu tedbir \u00f6ncesi ve sonras\u0131ndaki ya\u015fam\u0131 k\u0131yaslanarak maruz kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 olumsuz etki de\u011ferlendirilmektedir. Ayr\u0131ca sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n ciddiyetinin belirlenmesinde ba\u015fvurucunun iddia etti\u011fi \u00f6znel alg\u0131lar\u0131n somut ba\u015fvuruda mevcut nesnel ko\u015fullarla birlikte de\u011ferlendirilmesi gerekmektedir. Bunun yan\u0131 s\u0131ra yap\u0131lacak incelemenin iddia edilen tedbirin hem maddi hem de manevi etkilerini kapsamas\u0131 gerekmektedir. A\u0130HM, ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n \u015fik\u00e2yet edilen tasarrufun \u00f6zel hayatlar\u0131 \u00fczerindeki olumsuz sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 somut verilere dayal\u0131 olarak uygun \u015fekilde ispatlamakla y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fc olduklar\u0131n\u0131 ifade etmektedir. Ayr\u0131ca ba\u015fvurucular s\u00f6z konusu \u015fik\u00e2yetlerini ulusal merciler \u00f6n\u00fcnde de uygun \u015fekilde dile getirmi\u015f olmal\u0131d\u0131r (Denisov\/Ukrayna, [BD], B. No: 2011\/76639, 25\/9\/2018, \u00a7\u00a7 113-117).<\/p>\n
26. A\u0130HM Lekavi\u010dien\u0117\/Litvanya davas\u0131nda avukatl\u0131k mesle\u011finin onur ve ilkelerine ayk\u0131r\u0131 davran\u0131\u015flarda bulundu\u011fu ve y\u00fcksek ahlaki karaktere sahip olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle baro levhas\u0131na yaz\u0131lma talebi reddedilen ba\u015fvurucunun \u015fik\u00e2yetlerini ele alm\u0131\u015f ve avukatl\u0131k mesle\u011fine ili\u015fkin olarak \u00e7e\u015fitli tespitlerde bulunmu\u015ftur (Lekavi\u010dien\u0117\/Litvanya, B. No: 48427\/09, 27\/6\/2017). A\u0130HM, hukuk fak\u00fcltesi mezunu olan ba\u015fvurucunun baro levhas\u0131na yaz\u0131lma talebinin reddedilmesinin onun itibar\u0131n\u0131 ve mesleki ili\u015fkilerini etkiledi\u011fini belirtmi\u015f ve verilen kararla S\u00f6zle\u015fme’nin 8. maddesinde d\u00fczenlenen temel haklara m\u00fcdahale edildi\u011fini kabul etmi\u015ftir (Lekavi\u010dien\u0117\/Litvanya, \u00a7 37).<\/p>\n
27. A\u0130HM, Avrupa Konseyi Bakanlar Komitesinin R(2000)21 say\u0131l\u0131 Tavsiye Karar\u0131\u2019na de\u011finmi\u015f ve adaletin tesis edilmesinde \u00f6nemli ve \u00f6zel rolleri bulunan avukatlar\u0131n ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z \u015fekilde g\u00f6rev yapan profesyoneller olduklar\u0131n\u0131, bir\u00e7ok konuda sorumluluklar\u0131n\u0131n bulundu\u011funu, avukatlar\u0131n meslek hayatlar\u0131nda d\u00fcr\u00fcst ve onurlu davranmalar\u0131 gerekti\u011fini, s\u0131r saklamakla y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fc olduklar\u0131n\u0131 ifade etmi\u015ftir. A\u0130HM evrakta sahtecilik ve doland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k yapan, bu nedenle hakk\u0131nda ceza soru\u015fturmalar\u0131 ba\u015flad\u0131ktan sonra ismini baro levhas\u0131ndan sildiren ba\u015fvurucunun baro levhas\u0131na yeniden yaz\u0131lma talebinin reddedilmesinde keyf\u00ee bir durumun bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, di\u011fer bireylerin haklar\u0131n\u0131 korumak ve yarg\u0131 sistemini do\u011fru \u015fekilde i\u015fletmek amac\u0131yla ba\u015fvurucuya y\u00f6nelen m\u00fcdahalenin demokratik toplum d\u00fczeninin gereklerine uygun oldu\u011fu sonucuna ula\u015fm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ayr\u0131ca A\u0130HM, h\u00e2kim ve savc\u0131lara \u00e7ok daha s\u0131k\u0131 ko\u015fullar\u0131n uyguland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirtmi\u015f, neticede \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edilmedi\u011fi sonucuna ula\u015fm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r (Lekavi\u010dien\u0117\/Litvanya, \u00a7\u00a7 51-57).<\/p>\n
28. A\u0130HM, (Mataescu\/Romanya B. No: 1944\/10, 14\/1\/2014) davas\u0131nda \u00f6zel hayata y\u00f6nelik m\u00fcdahalelerin kanunla \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015f olma, me\u015fru ama\u00e7 ta\u015f\u0131ma ve demokratik toplumda gerekli olma ko\u015fullar\u0131n\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131mad\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00fcrece S\u00f6zle\u015fme’nin \u00f6zel hayata ili\u015fkin 8. maddesini ihlal edece\u011fini hat\u0131rlatm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. A\u0130HM kanunla \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015f olma \u015fart\u0131n\u0131n kanunun kalitesi, anla\u015f\u0131labilirli\u011fi, eri\u015filebilirli\u011fi, \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclebilirli\u011fi gibi birtak\u0131m hususlar\u0131 ihtiva etti\u011fini belirtmi\u015ftir. A\u0130HM somut olayda; avukatl\u0131k mesle\u011finin yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 d\u00fczenleyen kurallar\u0131n ba\u015fvurucu a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan ba\u015fka bir mesle\u011fin yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n avukatl\u0131k mesle\u011finin icras\u0131na engel oldu\u011funun anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flayacak \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclebilir olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 tespit etmi\u015f, m\u00fcdahalenin \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclebilir olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle kanunla \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015f olma \u015fart\u0131n\u0131n ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmedi\u011fi sonucuna varm\u0131\u015f ve 8. maddenin ihlal edildi\u011fine karar vermi\u015ftir (Mataescu\/Romanya, \u00a7\u00a7 26-33).<\/p>\n
V. \u0130NCELEME VE GEREK\u00c7E<\/p>\n
29. Anayasa Mahkemesinin 12\/12\/2024 tarihinde yapm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu toplant\u0131da ba\u015fvuru incelenip gere\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcld\u00fc:<\/p>\n
A. \u00d6zel Hayata Sayg\u0131 Hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130hlal Edildi\u011fine \u0130li\u015fkin \u0130ddia<\/p>\n
1. Ba\u015fvurucunun \u0130ddialar\u0131 ve Bakanl\u0131k G\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fc<\/p>\n
30. Ba\u015fvurucu; hakk\u0131nda hi\u00e7bir somut delil bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 h\u00e2lde ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcyle iltisakl\u0131 oldu\u011fu gerek\u00e7esiyle noterlik atamas\u0131n\u0131n yap\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, h\u00e2kimlik mesle\u011finden \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n noterli\u011fe atanmas\u0131na engel olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, idari yarg\u0131da a\u00e7t\u0131\u011f\u0131 y\u00fcr\u00fctmenin durdurulmas\u0131 talepli davalar\u0131n reddedilmesinin mevzuata ve hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011funu iddia etmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu bunun yan\u0131nda, noterlik ba\u015fvurular\u0131ndan sonra OHAL KHK’s\u0131 ile 1512 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’a ekleme yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, s\u00f6z konusu eklemenin \u00f6nceki tarihli noterlik ilanlar\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden uygulanma olana\u011f\u0131 bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, ayr\u0131ca OHAL’in gerektirmedi\u011fi konularda KHK \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n Anayasa’ya ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011funu belirtmi\u015ftir. Noterli\u011fe atanmamas\u0131 nedeniyle maddi ve manevi kay\u0131plar ya\u015fad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ifade eden ba\u015fvurucu su\u00e7 ve cezalar\u0131n kanunili\u011fi ilkesinin, ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131n\u0131n, m\u00fclkiyet hakk\u0131n\u0131n ve adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
31. Bakanl\u0131k g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnde; ba\u015fvurucunun \u015fik\u00e2yetlerinin temelde idari yarg\u0131 mercilerinin kararlar\u0131n\u0131n haks\u0131z oldu\u011funa y\u00f6nelik kanun yolu \u015fik\u00e2yeti niteli\u011finde oldu\u011fu ve bu hususun kabul edilebilirlik incelemesinde dikkate al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir. Esasa ili\u015fkin olarak ise ilgili mevzuat h\u00fck\u00fcmlerine ve Anayasa Mahkemesi i\u00e7tihad\u0131na yer verilerek ihlal iddialar\u0131n\u0131n incelenmesinde an\u0131lan h\u00fck\u00fcmler ve i\u00e7tihat ile somut olay\u0131n kendine \u00f6zg\u00fc ko\u015fullar\u0131n\u0131n dikkate al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi ifade edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
32. Bakanl\u0131k g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne kar\u015f\u0131 beyan\u0131nda ba\u015fvurucu, H\u00e2kimler ve Savc\u0131lar Kurulunun 15\/11\/2022 tarihli karar\u0131 ile g\u00f6reve iade edildi\u011fini ve 21\/11\/2022 tarihinde fiilen h\u00e2kimlik mesle\u011fine ba\u015flad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirtmi\u015ftir. Ayr\u0131ca 17\/6\/2016 tarihinde emeklilik s\u00fcresini tamamlad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve h\u00e2kimlik mesle\u011finden \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmadan \u00f6nce de noterlik ba\u015fvurular\u0131 yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ancak geliri d\u00fc\u015f\u00fck yerleri yazmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u00e7in atanamad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, meslekten \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131ld\u0131ktan sonraki ba\u015fvurular\u0131n\u0131n hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 olarak reddedilmesi nedeniyle ise gelir kayb\u0131 ya\u015fad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, maddi ve manevi olarak zarar g\u00f6rd\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc ifade etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
2. De\u011ferlendirme<\/p>\n
a. Ba\u015fvuruyu \u0130nceleme Usul\u00fc<\/p>\n
33. Anayasa, temel hak ve \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fcklerin korunmas\u0131na ili\u015fkin olarak ola\u011fan ve ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc d\u00f6nemler i\u00e7in iki ayr\u0131 hukuki rejim \u00f6ng\u00f6rmektedir. Ola\u011fan d\u00f6nemde temel hak ve \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fcklerin s\u0131n\u0131rlanmas\u0131 rejimi Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 13. maddesinde d\u00fczenlenmi\u015fken ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc d\u00f6nemde temel hak ve \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fcklerin s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 ya da kullan\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n durdurulmas\u0131 rejimi Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 15. maddesinde yer almaktad\u0131r (AYM, E.2018\/89, K.2019\/84, 14\/11\/2019, \u00a7 5).<\/p>\n
34. Bu durumla birlikte bir tedbirin OHAL tedbiri olarak nitelendirilebilmesi ve incelemenin Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n OHAL d\u00f6nemi i\u00e7in \u00f6ng\u00f6rd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc denetim rejimi kapsam\u0131nda yap\u0131labilmesi i\u00e7in Anayasa Mahkemesinin \u00f6nceki kararlar\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131klad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ko\u015fullar\u0131n da bulunmas\u0131 gerekir. Bu ba\u011flamda tedbirin OHAL tedbiri olarak kabul edilmesi i\u00e7in ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc durumun var olmas\u0131 ve ilan edilmesi, tedbirin ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc h\u00e2lin ilan\u0131na sebep olan tehdit veya tehlikelerin bertaraf edilmesine y\u00f6nelik olmas\u0131 ve OHAL s\u00fcresiyle s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 uygulanmas\u0131 \u015feklindeki ko\u015fullar da bulunmal\u0131d\u0131r (Ayd\u0131n Yavuz ve di\u011ferleri, \u00a7\u00a7 188-191; AYM, E.2018\/89, K.2019\/84, 14\/11\/2019, \u00a7 11; Tamer Mahmuto\u011flu [GK], B. No: 2017\/38953, 23\/7\/2020, \u00a7\u00a7 71-75).<\/p>\n
35. Somut olayda ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fctleriyle irtibat ve iltisak i\u00e7inde olanlar\u0131n noterli\u011fe atanmamas\u0131 ile ilgili tedbirin uyguland\u0131\u011f\u0131 d\u00f6nemde OHAL ilan edildi\u011fi, an\u0131lan tedbirin OHAL ilan\u0131na neden olan tehditlerin veya tehlikelerin bertaraf edilmesine y\u00f6nelik oldu\u011fu a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r. Ayr\u0131ca tedbirin OHAL d\u00f6neminde uyguland\u0131\u011f\u0131, h\u00fck\u00fcm ve sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 bu d\u00f6nemde do\u011furdu\u011fu g\u00f6zetildi\u011finde ba\u015fvurunun Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 15. maddesi kapsam\u0131nda incelenmesi gerekti\u011fi sonucuna ula\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
b. Uygulanabilirlik Y\u00f6n\u00fcnden<\/p>\n
36. Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n “\u00d6zel hayat\u0131n gizlili\u011fi” ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 20. maddesinin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n ilgili k\u0131sm\u0131 \u015f\u00f6yledir:<\/p>\n
\u00a0\u201cHerkes, \u00f6zel hayat\u0131na … sayg\u0131 g\u00f6sterilmesini isteme hakk\u0131na sahiptir. \u00d6zel hayat\u0131n … gizlili\u011fine dokunulamaz.”<\/p>\n
37. Anayasa Mahkemesi, olaylar\u0131n ba\u015fvurucu taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lan hukuki nitelendirmesi ile ba\u011fl\u0131 olmay\u0131p olay ve olgular\u0131n hukuki tavsifini kendisi takdir eder.<\/p>\n
38. Ba\u015fvurucunun iddialar\u0131n\u0131n noterlik atamas\u0131n\u0131n yap\u0131lmayarak kendisinden alt s\u0131radaki belge sahiplerinin atanmas\u0131na, dolay\u0131s\u0131yla noterlik yapmas\u0131n\u0131n engellenmesine ili\u015fkin oldu\u011fu g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Ki\u015filerin mesleki hayatlar\u0131n\u0131n onlar\u0131n \u00f6zel hayatlar\u0131yla s\u0131k\u0131 bir ili\u015fkisi oldu\u011fu ve meslek hayat\u0131na y\u00f6nelik tedbirlerin ya da m\u00fcdahalelerin s\u00f6z konusu oldu\u011fu dava s\u00fcre\u00e7lerinde \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n g\u00fcndeme geldi\u011fi yads\u0131namaz. Bununla birlikte \u00f6ncelikle bu t\u00fcr i\u015flemlerin mesleki hayata y\u00f6nelik tedbirlerin ya da m\u00fcdahalelerin hangi durumlarda \u00f6zel hayat kapsam\u0131nda g\u00f6r\u00fclmeye uygun oldu\u011fu veya ba\u015fvuru konusu edilen uyu\u015fmazl\u0131klar\u0131n hangilerinin bu ba\u011flamda uygulanabilir kabul edilece\u011fi hususlar\u0131nda \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fctler belirlenmesi ve bu \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fctler dikkate al\u0131narak de\u011ferlendirmeler yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekmektedir (Tamer Mahmuto\u011flu \u00a7 82).<\/p>\n
39. Ba\u015fvuru dosyas\u0131 incelendi\u011finde ba\u015fvurucunun meslek hayat\u0131na y\u00f6nelik olarak al\u0131nan tedbirin \u00f6zel hayata ili\u015fkin herhangi bir nedene dayanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir. Bununla birlikte ba\u015fvurucunun mesleki hayat\u0131na y\u00f6nelik m\u00fcdahalenin onun \u00f6zel hayat\u0131na ciddi \u015fekilde etki etti\u011fi ve bu etkinin belirli bir a\u011f\u0131rl\u0131k d\u00fczeyine ula\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Zira al\u0131nan tedbirin ba\u015fvurucunun ba\u015fkalar\u0131 ile ili\u015fki kurabilme ve geli\u015ftirebilme imk\u00e2n\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6nemli \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde zay\u0131flamas\u0131na, sosyal ve mesleki itibar\u0131n\u0131 koruyabilmesi a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan ciddi sonu\u00e7lar do\u011furmas\u0131na yol a\u00e7aca\u011f\u0131 de\u011ferlendirilmi\u015ftir. Bu durumda sonuca dayal\u0131 nedenlerle ba\u015fvurunun \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda incelenebilir nitelikte oldu\u011fu kanaatine var\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r (Tamer Mahmuto\u011flu, \u00a7\u00a7 84-96).<\/p>\n
c. Kabul Edilebilirlik Y\u00f6n\u00fcnden<\/p>\n
40. 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 \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n kabul edilebilir oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
d. Esas Y\u00f6n\u00fcnden<\/p>\n
i. Genel \u0130lkeler<\/p>\n
41. Anayasa’n\u0131n 15. maddesine g\u00f6re yap\u0131lacak inceleme; m\u00fcdahalenin Anayasa’daki \u00e7ekirdek haklarla ilgili olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, an\u0131lan maddenin ikinci f\u0131kras\u0131nda say\u0131lan hak ve \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fcklere dokunup dokunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n, milletleraras\u0131 hukuktan do\u011fan y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fcklere ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k te\u015fkil edip etmedi\u011finin ve durumun gerektirdi\u011fi \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n tespitiyle s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 olacakt\u0131r (Ayla Demir \u0130\u015fat [GK], B. No: 2018\/24245, 8\/10\/2020, \u00a7 146).<\/p>\n
42. Sava\u015f, seferberlik veya OHAL gibi ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc y\u00f6netim usullerinin benimsendi\u011fi d\u00f6nemlerde Anayasa’n\u0131n 15. maddesinin ikinci f\u0131kras\u0131nda yer alan ve dokunulmas\u0131 yasaklanan \u00e7ekirdek haklar aras\u0131nda \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131 bulunmamaktad\u0131r. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla bu hak y\u00f6n\u00fcnden OHAL d\u00f6neminde Anayasa’daki g\u00fcvencelere ayk\u0131r\u0131 tedbirler al\u0131nmas\u0131 m\u00fcmk\u00fcnd\u00fcr. Ayr\u0131ca an\u0131lan hak, milletleraras\u0131 hukuktan kaynaklanan y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fck olarak insan haklar\u0131 alan\u0131nda T\u00fcrkiye’nin taraf oldu\u011fu uluslararas\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerden \u00f6zellikle Medeni ve Siyasi Haklara \u0130li\u015fkin Uluslararas\u0131 S\u00f6zle\u015fmesi’nin 4. maddesinin (2) numaral\u0131 ve S\u00f6zle\u015fme’nin 15. maddesinin (2) numaral\u0131 f\u0131kralar\u0131nda ve S\u00f6zle\u015fme’ye ek protokollerde dokunulmas\u0131 yasaklanan \u00e7ekirdek haklar aras\u0131nda da say\u0131lmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. \u00d6te yandan somut olaydaki \u00f6zel hayata ili\u015fkin tedbirin milletleraras\u0131 hukuktan kaynaklanan di\u011fer herhangi bir y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011fe (ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc d\u00f6nemlerde de korunmaya devam eden bir g\u00fcvenceye) ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011fu da saptanmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r (Ayla Demir \u0130\u015fat, \u00a7\u00a7 147, 148).<\/p>\n
43. Bununla birlikte \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131, \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filer taraf\u0131ndan da olsa hakk\u0131n \u00f6ng\u00f6rd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc g\u00fcvencelere keyf\u00ee \u015fekilde m\u00fcdahale edilmesini yasaklar. Ki\u015filerin keyf\u00ee \u015fekilde mesleki hayatlar\u0131na, dolay\u0131s\u0131yla \u00f6zel hayatlar\u0131na m\u00fcdahale edilmemesi, aksi y\u00f6ndeki durumda meydana gelmesi muhtemel olan etkiler ve sonu\u00e7lar d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnde en \u00f6nemli g\u00fcvenceler aras\u0131ndad\u0131r. \u00d6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fcklerin yerine getirilmesi, ki\u015filerin ve ailelerinin gelece\u011fini ve itibar\u0131n\u0131 etkileyen mesleki hayata y\u00f6nelik tedbirlerin keyf\u00ee olmamas\u0131, bu kapsamda do\u011fan uyu\u015fmazl\u0131klar\u0131n \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n gereklilikleri ba\u011flam\u0131nda \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcmlenmesi ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc y\u00f6netim usullerinin benimsendi\u011fi d\u00f6nemlerde de ge\u00e7erli olan temel g\u00fcvencelerdir (Ayla Demir \u0130\u015fat, \u00a7\u00a7 149, 150).<\/p>\n
44. Anayasa’n\u0131n 15. maddesi uyar\u0131nca, ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc y\u00f6netim rejimlerinin uyguland\u0131\u011f\u0131 d\u00f6nemde temel hak ve \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fcklere m\u00fcdahale olu\u015fturan tedbirin me\u015fru olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 hususunda yap\u0131lacak son inceleme bunun durumun gerektirdi\u011fi \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n belirlenmesidir.<\/p>\n
45. Uygulanan tedbirin ve bu kapsamda yarg\u0131 mercilerince sonuca ba\u011flanan uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n Anayasa’n\u0131n 15. maddesi kapsam\u0131nda durumun gerektirdi\u011fi \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde oldu\u011funun s\u00f6ylenebilmesi i\u00e7in \u00f6ncelikle keyf\u00ee olmamas\u0131 gerekir. Di\u011fer taraftan s\u00f6z konusu tedbirin \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcl\u00fc olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 de\u011ferlendirilirken elbette T\u00fcrkiye’de OHAL ilan\u0131na sebebiyet veren durumun \u00f6zellikleri ve OHAL ilan\u0131 sonras\u0131nda ortaya \u00e7\u0131kan ko\u015fullar dikkate al\u0131nmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
46. Anayasa’n\u0131n 15. maddesindeki \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcl\u00fcl\u00fck, ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc y\u00f6netim usullerinin uygulanmas\u0131na neden olan durum kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131ndaki \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcl\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ifade etmektedir. Buna g\u00f6re temel hak ve \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fcklerin kullan\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 veya durdurulmas\u0131 i\u00e7in ba\u015fvurulan arac\u0131n amac\u0131 ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirmeye elveri\u015fli ve bunun i\u00e7in gerekli olmas\u0131, ayr\u0131ca ara\u00e7la amac\u0131n \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcl\u00fc bir oran i\u00e7inde bulunmas\u0131 gerekir (AYM, E.1990\/25, K.1991\/1, 10\/1\/1991). Tedbir, ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc durumu olu\u015fturan tehdit veya tehlikenin ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 amac\u0131na ula\u015fma bak\u0131m\u0131ndan elveri\u015fli ve bu amac\u0131n ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmesi i\u00e7in gerekli olmal\u0131; ayr\u0131ca ula\u015f\u0131lmak istenen ama\u00e7 do\u011frultusunda ortaya \u00e7\u0131kan kamu yarar\u0131 ile temel hak ve \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131ran tedbirin birey \u00fczerindeki olumsuz etkisi aras\u0131nda orant\u0131s\u0131zl\u0131k bulunmamal\u0131d\u0131r (Ayla Demir \u0130\u015fat, \u00a7 154; bir\u00e7ok karar aras\u0131ndan bkz. AYM, E.2013\/57, K.2013\/162, 26\/12\/2013).<\/p>\n
47. \u00d6l\u00e7\u00fcl\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn unsurlar\u0131n\u0131n tespitinde tedbirin al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 d\u00f6nemin t\u00fcm \u015fartlar\u0131 birlikte de\u011ferlendirilmelidir. Ayr\u0131ca m\u00fcdahale edilen hak ve \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn niteli\u011fi de \u00f6nemlidir. Yine tedbirin al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 zaman\u0131n da \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcl\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn belirlenmesinde g\u00f6z\u00f6n\u00fcne al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekir. Bu bak\u0131mdan ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc durumu olu\u015fturan olaylar\u0131n ya\u015fand\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve somut tehlikenin t\u00fcm ger\u00e7ekli\u011fiyle birlikte ortada oldu\u011fu d\u00f6nemde al\u0131nan bir tedbir ile tehlikenin veya bunu do\u011furan tehdidin b\u00fcy\u00fck \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde bertaraf edildi\u011fi bir zamanda al\u0131nan tedbir farkl\u0131 \u015fekilde de\u011ferlendirilmelidir. \u00d6te yandan temel hak ve \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fcklere m\u00fcdahale te\u015fkil eden tedbirin s\u00fcresi, kapsam\u0131 ve a\u011f\u0131rl\u0131\u011f\u0131, \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcl\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn belirlenmesinde dikkate al\u0131nmal\u0131d\u0131r. Nitekim m\u00fcdahalenin s\u00fcresi artt\u0131k\u00e7a bireyin \u00fczerindeki k\u00fclfet de a\u011f\u0131rla\u015fmaktad\u0131r. Bunun yan\u0131nda bir tedbir k\u0131sa s\u00fcreli olmakla birlikte kapsam\u0131 veya a\u011f\u0131rl\u0131\u011f\u0131 itibar\u0131yla temel hak ve \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fckleri \u00e7ok ciddi \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde etkileyebilir. B\u00f6ylece tedbirin a\u011f\u0131rl\u0131\u011f\u0131, s\u00fcresinden ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z olarak bireyin a\u015f\u0131r\u0131 bir k\u00fclfet alt\u0131na girmesine neden olabilir (Ayla Demir \u0130\u015fat, \u00a7\u00a7 155, 156).<\/p>\n
48. Di\u011fer taraftan temel hak ve \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fcklere y\u00f6nelik \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcs\u00fcz veya keyf\u00ee m\u00fcdahaleler kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda bireylere, bunlara kar\u015f\u0131 koyabilecekleri usule ili\u015fkin g\u00fcvencelerin sa\u011flanmas\u0131 gerekir. Bu ba\u011flamda idari makamlar ve mahkemeler, tedbirin keyf\u00ee olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ortaya koyan ilgili ve yeterli gerek\u00e7eler olu\u015fturmal\u0131d\u0131r. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla bireylerin bu g\u00fcvencelerden \u00f6nemli \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde yoksun b\u0131rak\u0131lmalar\u0131 \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcl\u00fcl\u00fck ilkesiyle ba\u011fda\u015fmayacakt\u0131r. Ayr\u0131ca bir tedbirin ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc durumu olu\u015fturan tehdit veya tehlikeyi bertaraf etmeye elveri\u015fli, bunun i\u00e7in gerekli ve ula\u015f\u0131lmak istenen ama\u00e7 ile orant\u0131l\u0131 olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 hususlar\u0131nda s\u00f6z konusu tehdit veya tehlike ile kar\u015f\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131ya kalan ve onunla m\u00fccadele etme bak\u0131m\u0131ndan \u00f6ncelikli sorumlulu\u011fu bulunan kamu makamlar\u0131n\u0131n geni\u015f bir takdir alan\u0131 bulunmaktad\u0131r. Bununla birlikte bireysel ba\u015fvuruya konu edildi\u011finde al\u0131nan tedbirin bu takdir alan\u0131n\u0131 a\u015f\u0131p a\u015fmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 incelemek Anayasa Mahkemesinin g\u00f6revidir (Ayla Demir \u0130\u015fat, \u00a7 157).<\/p>\n
49. 667 say\u0131l\u0131 KHK\u2019n\u0131n 3. ve 4. maddeleri kapsam\u0131nda kamu g\u00f6revinden veya meslekten \u00e7\u0131karma, adli su\u00e7 veya disiplin su\u00e7u i\u015flenmesi kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131nda uygulanan yapt\u0131r\u0131mlardan farkl\u0131 olarak ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fctleri ile mill\u00ee g\u00fcvenli\u011fe kar\u015f\u0131 faaliyette bulundu\u011fu kabul edilen di\u011fer yap\u0131lar\u0131n kamu kurum ve kurulu\u015flar\u0131ndaki varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ortadan kald\u0131rmay\u0131 ama\u00e7layan, ge\u00e7ici olmayan ve nihai sonu\u00e7 do\u011furan bir ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc tedbir niteli\u011findedir. Bu kapsamda yap\u0131lacak de\u011ferlendirme adli su\u00e7 veya disiplin su\u00e7u niteli\u011findeki somut bir eylemin soru\u015fturulmas\u0131 mahiyetinde olmay\u0131p buna ili\u015fkin ula\u015f\u0131lacak kanaat de cezai sorumlulu\u011fun tespitinden ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z olacakt\u0131r (AYM, E.2016\/6 (D. \u0130\u015f), K.2016\/12, 4\/8\/2016, \u00a7\u00a7 79, 86, 96; Mustafa Bald\u0131r [2. B.], B. No: 2016\/29354, 4\/4\/2018, \u00a7 68; Mustafa \u00d6zterzi [GK], B. No: 2016\/14597, 31\/10\/2019, \u00a7 103).<\/p>\n
ii. \u0130lkelerin Olaya Uygulanmas\u0131<\/p>\n
50. Somut olayda h\u00e2kimlik mesle\u011finden \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lan ba\u015fvurucu, noterlik belgesine dayanarak m\u00fcnhal noterlik ilanlar\u0131 uyar\u0131nca iki kez noterlik ba\u015fvurusu yapm\u0131\u015f ancak ba\u015fvurucunun atamas\u0131 yap\u0131lmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. \u0130lgili noterli\u011fe alt s\u0131radaki belge sahibinin atanmas\u0131 \u00fczerine ba\u015fvurucunun \u00f6nceki say\u0131l\u0131 belge sahibi olarak kendisinin atanmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi y\u00f6n\u00fcndeki dilek\u00e7eye idarece cevap verilmemi\u015ftir. Mahkeme, ba\u015fvurucunun iptal taleplerini h\u00e2kimlik mesle\u011finden \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131 nedeniyle ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fctleriyle irtibatl\u0131 veya iltisakl\u0131 olmama ko\u015fulunu sa\u011flamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle reddetmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
51. Ba\u015fvurucunun iddias\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6z\u00fc, h\u00e2kimlik mesle\u011finden \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcyle irtibatl\u0131 ya da iltisakl\u0131 oldu\u011funun kabul edilmesi bak\u0131m\u0131ndan yeterli kabul edilemeyece\u011fine ve \u00f6rg\u00fctle ne \u015fekilde irtibatl\u0131 ya da iltisakl\u0131 oldu\u011funa dair gerek\u00e7elerin ortaya konulamad\u0131\u011f\u0131na ili\u015fkindir. Bu iddias\u0131na ek olarak ba\u015fvurucu22\/6\/2017 tarihli ve 30104 ikinci m\u00fckerrer say\u0131l\u0131 Resm\u00ee Gazete’de yay\u0131mlanan 691 say\u0131l\u0131 KHK’n\u0131n Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131n noterlik hakk\u0131ndaki ilan tarihlerinden (bkz. \u00a7\u00a7 9, 10) sonra y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe girdi\u011fini, sonradan y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe giren KHK h\u00fck\u00fcmlerinin kendisine uygulanmas\u0131n\u0131n m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 hem yarg\u0131 mercileri hem de Anayasa Mahkemesi \u00f6n\u00fcnde dile getirmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvuruya konu s\u00fcre\u00e7 kesinle\u015ftikten sonra neticelenen ceza davas\u0131nda ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7undan beraat karar\u0131 verilmi\u015f ve meslekten \u00e7\u0131karma karar\u0131 kald\u0131r\u0131larak ba\u015fvurucu, g\u00f6reve iade edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
52. Bununla birlikte 1512 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 7. maddesinin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n (6) numaral\u0131 bendine g\u00f6re -somut olay ba\u011flam\u0131nda- kesinle\u015fmi\u015f bir ceza veya disiplin karar\u0131 sonucunda h\u00e2kim olmak niteli\u011fini kaybetmi\u015f olanlar\u0131n noterli\u011fe kabul edilemeyece\u011fi h\u00fck\u00fcm alt\u0131na al\u0131nm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda kesinle\u015fmi\u015f bir ceza mahk\u00fbmiyeti veya disiplin karar\u0131 bulunmaks\u0131z\u0131n an\u0131lan OHAL KHK h\u00fck\u00fcmleri uyar\u0131nca ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc tedbir kapsam\u0131nda h\u00e2kimlik mesle\u011finden \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6zetildi\u011finde somut olayda bu \u015fart\u0131n uygulanamayaca\u011f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r. \u00d6te yandan an\u0131lan Kanun’da noterli\u011fe kabul \u015fart\u0131 olarak ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fctleriyle iltisakl\u0131 veya irtibatl\u0131 bulunmamak da d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir. Yarg\u0131 mercilerince ba\u015fvurucunun meslekten \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6zetilerek bu \u015fart\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131mad\u0131\u011f\u0131 kabul edilmi\u015ftir. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla somut olay\u0131n mahkemenin an\u0131lan gerek\u00e7esi kapsam\u0131nda incelenmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
53. Anayasa Mahkemesi ki\u015finin ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fctleriyle irtibatl\u0131 ya da iltisakl\u0131 oldu\u011fu gerek\u00e7esiyle noterli\u011fe kabul edilmemesinin olgusal temele sahip olmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fini, ilgili Kanun h\u00fckm\u00fc (bkz. \u00a7 20) nedeniyle tesis edilen i\u015flemlerin keyf\u00ee uygulamalara kar\u015f\u0131 yarg\u0131sal denetime tabi oldu\u011funu belirtmi\u015ftir (AYM, E.2018\/89, K.2019\/84, 14\/11\/2019; \u00a7 21). Anayasa’n\u0131n 13. maddesi y\u00f6n\u00fcnden yap\u0131lan bu de\u011ferlendirmeler Anayasa’n\u0131n 15. maddesi y\u00f6n\u00fcnden de ge\u00e7erlidir (Fadime Kolutek ve di\u011ferleri [GK], B. No: 2017\/25008, 31\/1\/2024, \u00a7 43). Bu \u00e7er\u00e7evede Anayasa Mahkemesince Anayasa’n\u0131n 15. maddesi anlam\u0131nda \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcl\u00fcl\u00fck incelemesi yap\u0131lan bir\u00e7ok ba\u015fvuruda, e\u011fer ki\u015filerin eylemleri ile uygulanan tedbir aras\u0131ndaki ba\u011flant\u0131 somut olgulara dayal\u0131 olarak kurulamam\u0131\u015fsa ihlal sonucuna ula\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r (bir\u00e7ok karar aras\u0131ndan bkz. Ayla Demir \u0130\u015fat, \u00a7\u00a7 151-163; Mustafa \u00d6zterzi, \u00a7\u00a7 119-121).<\/p>\n
54. Anayasa Mahkemesinin norm denetimine ili\u015fkin karar\u0131nda belirtildi\u011fi \u00fczere Bakanl\u0131k, ki\u015finin noterlik mesle\u011fine al\u0131nmamas\u0131n\u0131 hakl\u0131 k\u0131lacak nitelikte olgusal temeli olan ba\u011flant\u0131lar\u0131n iltisak ve irtibat olarak de\u011ferlendirilmesinde cezai sorumlulu\u011fun bulunup bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z olarak sadece ki\u015finin noterlik g\u00f6revine al\u0131nmas\u0131n\u0131n uygun olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnde kendisine yap\u0131lan bildirimlerle ba\u011fl\u0131 olmaks\u0131z\u0131n her t\u00fcrl\u00fc olay, olgu, bilgi ve bulguyu serbest\u00e7e g\u00f6zetebilecektir (bkz. \u00a7 21). Bu \u00e7er\u00e7evede OHAL \u015fartlar\u0131 dikkate ald\u0131\u011f\u0131nda ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fctleriyle irtibat veya iltisak\u0131n\u0131n bulundu\u011fu hususunda objektif ve ikna edici nitelikte gerek\u00e7elerin olmas\u0131 durumunda ilgili ki\u015filerin \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen me\u015fru ama\u00e7lar do\u011frultusunda ilave tedbirlere maruz b\u0131rak\u0131lmas\u0131 makul kabul edilebilir. Bu noktada \u00f6nemli olan husus, an\u0131lan ama\u00e7 do\u011frultusunda tesis edilen i\u015flemlerin ilgili mevzuat kapsam\u0131nda oldu\u011funun ve \u00f6rg\u00fctle iltisakl\u0131 ya da irtibatl\u0131 olma durumunun somut olgulara dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n idari ve yarg\u0131sal makamlar taraf\u0131ndan ilgili ve yeterli gerek\u00e7elerle ortaya konulmas\u0131 ve al\u0131nan tedbirin keyf\u00ee olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n s\u00f6ylenebilmesi i\u00e7in bu y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn OHAL \u015fartlar\u0131nda da olsa yerine getirilmesi gerekir (\u015e\u00fckran Da\u011f Cabir, \u00a7 38).<\/p>\n
55. Ba\u015fvurucunun ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc tedbir kapsam\u0131nda h\u00e2kimlik mesle\u011finden \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131 \u00f6rg\u00fctle irtibatl\u0131 ya da iltisakl\u0131 oldu\u011funun kabul edilebilmesi a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan bir \u015f\u00fcpheye neden olsa da ba\u015fkaca somut eylem, olay ya da olgularla desteklenmedi\u011fi durumda bu t\u00fcrden bir \u015f\u00fcpheye dayan\u0131larak mevcut olaydaki gibi a\u011f\u0131r sonu\u00e7lar\u0131 olan i\u015flemler tesis edilmesi kamusal makamlardan beklenen ilgili ve yeterli gerek\u00e7e ortaya konulmas\u0131 y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k olu\u015fturacakt\u0131r. Yine \u00f6rg\u00fctle irtibatl\u0131 ya da iltisakl\u0131 olarak kabul edilmek i\u00e7in salt meslekten \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olman\u0131n yeterli kabul edilmesi, s\u00f6z konusu kavramlar\u0131n kapsam ve s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131n\u0131n yarg\u0131 kararlar\u0131yla geni\u015fletilmesi anlam\u0131na gelecektir.<\/p>\n
56. Yine ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fctleriyle irtibatl\u0131 ya da iltisakl\u0131 olundu\u011funun kabul\u00fc a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan salt meslekten \u00e7\u0131karma karar\u0131n\u0131n tek ba\u015f\u0131na yeterli g\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ve s\u00f6z konusu i\u015flem ya da karar\u0131n gerek\u00e7esinin bu tespit \u00fczerinden olu\u015fturuldu\u011fu durumda -somut olayda ba\u015fvurucunun hakk\u0131ndaki meslekten \u00e7\u0131karma karar\u0131 kald\u0131r\u0131larak g\u00f6reve iade edildi\u011fi de dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda- g\u00f6reve iade karar\u0131 verilmesinin s\u00f6z konusu gerek\u00e7eyi tamamen dayanaks\u0131z h\u00e2le getirece\u011fi a\u015fik\u00e2rd\u0131r.<\/p>\n
57. Bu \u00e7er\u00e7evede ba\u015fvurucunun meslekten \u00e7\u0131karma karar\u0131nda herhangi bir somut gerek\u00e7eye dayan\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, daval\u0131 idarece ter\u00f6rle irtibatl\u0131 veya iltisakl\u0131 oldu\u011funa ili\u015fkin olarak herhangi bir delil g\u00f6sterilemedi\u011fini yarg\u0131 mercileri \u00f6n\u00fcnde dile getirdi\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Buna kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k yarg\u0131 mercileri, ba\u015fvurucunun salt h\u00e2kimlik mesle\u011finden \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcyle iltisakl\u0131 ya da irtibatl\u0131 olman\u0131n gerek\u00e7esi olarak yeterli kabul etmi\u015ftir. Kararlar\u0131n gerek\u00e7elerinde ise ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda var olan herhangi bir bilgiye, ba\u015fvurucunun bir eylemine veya iltisakl\u0131 ya da irtibatl\u0131 olundu\u011funu g\u00f6steren herhangi bir vak\u0131aya yahut olguya yer vermemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
58. Bu durumun hem ki\u015fi hakk\u0131nda ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcyle irtibatl\u0131 ya da iltisakl\u0131 olmaya ili\u015fkin somut olgulara dayan\u0131lmas\u0131 hem de bu i\u015flemlere kar\u015f\u0131 yarg\u0131 yoluna gidilebilmesi g\u00fcvencesini bertaraf etti\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir. \u015eu h\u00e2lde somut olayda, noterli\u011fe kabul etmeme i\u015flemine kar\u015f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lan davada Anayasa Mahkemesinin norm denetimi karar\u0131nda usule ili\u015fkin g\u00fcvence olarak belirtilen yarg\u0131 yolu g\u00fcvencesinin uygulamada etkili bir \u015fekilde i\u015fledi\u011fi s\u00f6ylenemez (bkz. \u00a7 21).<\/p>\n
59. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla somut olayda an\u0131lan h\u00fckm\u00fcn (bkz. \u00a720) ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda uygulama olana\u011f\u0131n\u0131n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Mevcut ba\u015fvuruya \u00f6zg\u00fc \u015fartlarda ba\u015fvurucunun ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fctleriyle irtibatl\u0131 ya da iltisakl\u0131 oldu\u011fu hususunda verilen idari ve yarg\u0131sal kararlarda objektif ve ikna edici nitelikte gerek\u00e7elerin ortaya konulamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve ba\u015fvurucunun ilave tedbirlere maruz b\u0131rak\u0131lmas\u0131na ili\u015fkin gereklili\u011fin s\u00f6z konusu kavramlar\u0131n kapsam\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6sterecek \u015fekilde somut olgulara dayal\u0131 olarak ilgili ve yeterli gerek\u00e7elerle a\u00e7\u0131klanamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 de\u011ferlendirilmi\u015ftir. Uygulanan somut tedbirin ba\u015fvurucu \u00fczerinde do\u011furaca\u011f\u0131 etki de g\u00f6z\u00f6n\u00fcne al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda \u00f6zellikle yarg\u0131lama s\u00fcrecinde devletten beklenen y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fcklerin OHAL \u015fartlar\u0131nda da yerine getirilmesi gerekti\u011fi a\u00e7\u0131k olmas\u0131na ra\u011fmen mevcut ba\u015fvurunun \u015fartlar\u0131nda an\u0131lan y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011fe uygun \u015fekilde hareket edilmedi\u011fi kanaatine var\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
60. Ba\u015fvurucunun yarg\u0131 mercileri ve Anayasa Mahkemesi \u00f6n\u00fcnde ileri s\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc noterlik ilan tarihlerinde ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fctleriyle iltisakl\u0131 veya irtibatl\u0131 bulunanlar\u0131n noterli\u011fe kabul edilemeyece\u011fine ili\u015fkin h\u00fckm\u00fcn y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckte olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, dolay\u0131s\u0131yla 691say\u0131l\u0131 KHK ile getirilen h\u00fckm\u00fcn kendisine uygulanmayaca\u011f\u0131 iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkin olarak Anayasa’n\u0131n 15. maddesinde ifade edilen “durumun gerektirdi\u011fi \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde” kriteri y\u00f6n\u00fcnden yap\u0131lan incelemede Anayasa Mahkemesi, idari i\u015flemin tesis edildi\u011fi tarihteki hukuki duruma g\u00f6re yarg\u0131sal denetim yap\u0131lmamas\u0131n\u0131, \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda kanunilik ilkesi y\u00f6n\u00fcnden ihlal olarak g\u00f6rm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr (B.A.Y. [GK], B. No: 2019\/19788, 5\/7\/2022, \u00a7\u00a7 40-71). Anayasa Mahkemesi an\u0131lan kararda bu durumu Dan\u0131\u015ftay kararlar\u0131na at\u0131fla “…ilgili yarg\u0131 kararlar\u0131nda belirtildi\u011fi \u00fczere (bkz. \u00a7\u00a7 37,38) iptal davalar\u0131nda idari i\u015flemlerin hukuka uygunlu\u011funun yarg\u0131sal denetiminin s\u00f6z konusu i\u015flemlerin tesis edildi\u011fi tarihteki duruma g\u00f6re yap\u0131lmas\u0131 kurald\u0131r. (…)” \u015feklinde ortaya koymu\u015ftur (B.A.Y., \u00a7 66).<\/p>\n
61. Bir tedbirin Anayasa’n\u0131n 15. maddesi kapsam\u0131nda durumun gerektirdi\u011fi \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde oldu\u011funun s\u00f6ylenebilmesi i\u00e7in \u00f6ncelikle keyf\u00ee olmamas\u0131 (Ayla Demir \u0130\u015fat [GK], \u00a7 152), bunun i\u00e7in ise belli bir hukuki dayana\u011f\u0131n\u0131n olmas\u0131 gerekmektedir. Somut olaya bak\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131nda Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131n hem \u00c7obanlar Noterli\u011fine hem de K\u0131br\u0131s\u00e7\u0131k Noterli\u011fine ili\u015fkin ilanlar\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131ras\u0131yla 22\/4\/2017 ile 10\/6\/2017 tarihlerinde ve 691 say\u0131l\u0131 KHK’n\u0131n 22\/6\/2017 tarihli Resm\u00ee Gazete’de yay\u0131mlanmas\u0131ndan \u00f6nce yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
62. 1512 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 24. maddesinin ikinci f\u0131kras\u0131nda Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131n Resm\u00ee Gazete\u2019de ilan tarihinden itibaren bir ay tamamland\u0131ktan ve her h\u00e2lde an\u0131lan Kanun’un 23. maddesinin ikinci f\u0131kras\u0131na g\u00f6re verilen s\u00fcrenin bitiminden sonra isteklilerden 18. maddede g\u00f6sterilen defterdeki s\u0131rada en \u00f6nde bulunan\u0131, engel bir h\u00e2li olmamak \u015fart\u0131yla noterli\u011fe atayaca\u011f\u0131 d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir. Buna g\u00f6re noterli\u011fe atanma s\u00fcrecinin genel olarak Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131n ilana \u00e7\u0131kmas\u0131, ilan tarihinden itibaren bir ay i\u00e7inde taleplerin al\u0131nmas\u0131, sonras\u0131nda atama i\u015fleminin yap\u0131lmas\u0131 \u015feklinde i\u015fledi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
63. Somut olayda, ba\u015fvurucunun ilan tarihlerini esas alarak an\u0131lan KHK’n\u0131n kendisine uygulanmayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 yarg\u0131 mercileri \u00f6n\u00fcnde ileri s\u00fcrmesine ra\u011fmen yarg\u0131 mercilerince bu konuda herhangi bir de\u011ferlendirme yap\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir.Bakanl\u0131k taraf\u0131ndan noterlik ilanlar\u0131 an\u0131lan KHK’n\u0131n y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe girdi\u011fi tarihten \u00f6nce yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. \u0130lan tarihinden sonra bir ayl\u0131k m\u00fcracaat s\u00fcresinin bulundu\u011fu dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda, \u00c7obanlar Noterli\u011fi i\u00e7in son m\u00fcracaat tarihi 22\/5\/2017 olup bu tarih de an\u0131lan KHK’n\u0131n y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe girdi\u011fi tarihten \u00f6ncedir. K\u0131br\u0131s\u00e7\u0131k Noterli\u011fi i\u00e7in son m\u00fcracaat tarihi ise 13\/7\/2017 olup an\u0131lan KHK’n\u0131n y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe girdi\u011fi tarihten sonrad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
64. Bu \u00e7er\u00e7evede, hukukilik denetiminin hangi tarih esas al\u0131narak yap\u0131laca\u011f\u0131n\u0131n tespiti \u00f6ncelikle yarg\u0131 mercilerinin g\u00f6revi olup Anayasa Mahkemesinin, somut olayda yarg\u0131 mercilerinin bir de\u011ferlendirmesi olmamas\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, bu konuda bir tespitte bulunmas\u0131 makul olmayacakt\u0131r. Bu sebeple yarg\u0131 mercilerince bu konuda de\u011ferlendirme yap\u0131lmamas\u0131 ve bu suretle ba\u015fvurucunun esasl\u0131 olan bir iddias\u0131n\u0131n kararlarda kar\u015f\u0131lanmamas\u0131 da uygulanan tedbirin durumun gerektirdi\u011fi \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 bak\u0131m\u0131ndan \u00f6nemlidir.<\/p>\n
65. Bu itibarla yukar\u0131da a\u00e7\u0131klanan sebeplerle \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen g\u00fcvencelere uygun \u015fekilde ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilmeyen tedbirin durumun gerektirdi\u011fi \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde oldu\u011fu s\u00f6ylenemeyece\u011finden OHAL d\u00f6neminde temel hak ve \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fcklerin kullan\u0131m\u0131n\u0131n durdurulmas\u0131n\u0131 ve s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 d\u00fczenleyen Anayasa’n\u0131n 15. maddesindeki \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fctlere uygun olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 de\u011ferlendirilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
66. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle ba\u015fvurucunun \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi sonucuna ula\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
B. Makul S\u00fcrede Yarg\u0131lanma Hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130hlal Edildi\u011fine \u0130li\u015fkin \u0130ddia<\/p>\n
67. Ba\u015fvurucu; iki noterlik ba\u015fvurusu sonras\u0131nda atamas\u0131n\u0131n yap\u0131lmamas\u0131 \u00fczerine 2\/10\/2017 tarihinde dava a\u00e7t\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, davan\u0131n usulden reddedilmesi \u00fczerine iki i\u015flem i\u00e7in ayr\u0131 ayr\u0131 dava a\u00e7t\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, bu davalarda nihai kararlar\u0131n 29\/11\/2018 ve 24\/1\/2019 tarihlerinde verildi\u011fini beyan etmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu, uzun s\u00fcren yarg\u0131lama nedeniyle adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n g\u00fcvencelerinden olan makul s\u00fcrede yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
68. Anayasa Mahkemesi, olay ve olgular\u0131 somut ba\u015fvuru ile benzer nitelikte olan Veysi Ado ([GK], B. No: 2022\/100837, 27\/4\/2023) karar\u0131nda uygulanacak anayasal ilkeleri belirlemi\u015ftir. Bu \u00e7er\u00e7evede Anayasa Mahkemesi 9\/1\/2013 tarihli ve 6384 say\u0131l\u0131 Avrupa \u0130nsan Haklar\u0131 Mahkemesine Yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f Baz\u0131 Ba\u015fvurular\u0131n Tazminat \u00d6denmek Suretiyle \u00c7\u00f6z\u00fcm\u00fcne Dair Kanun’un ge\u00e7ici 2. maddesinde 28\/3\/2023 tarihli ve 7445 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 40. maddesi ile yap\u0131lan de\u011fi\u015fikli\u011fe g\u00f6re 9\/3\/2023 tarihi (bu tarih d\u00e2hil) itibar\u0131yla derdest olan yarg\u0131lamalar\u0131n makul s\u00fcrede sonu\u00e7land\u0131r\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddialar\u0131yla yap\u0131lan ba\u015fvurulara ili\u015fkin olarak Tazminat Komisyonuna ba\u015fvuru yolu t\u00fcketilmeden yap\u0131lan ba\u015fvurunun incelenmesinin bireysel ba\u015fvurunun ikincil niteli\u011fi ile ba\u011fda\u015fmayaca\u011f\u0131 neticesine varm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
69. Somut ba\u015fvuruda, an\u0131lan kararda a\u00e7\u0131klanan ilkelerden ve ula\u015f\u0131lan sonu\u00e7tan ayr\u0131lmay\u0131 gerektiren bir durum bulunmamaktad\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurunun bu k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131n di\u011fer kabul edilebilirlik nedenleri incelenmeksizin ba\u015fvuru yollar\u0131n\u0131n t\u00fcketilmemesi nedeniyle kabul edilemez oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
VI. G\u0130DER\u0130M<\/p>\n
70. Ba\u015fvurucu, ihlalin tespiti ile de\u011fi\u015fen miktarlarda maddi ve manevi tazminata h\u00fckmedilmesi talebinde bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
71. 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 yarg\u0131 mercilerince 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 (30\/3\/2011 tarihli ve 6216 say\u0131l\u0131 Anayasa Mahkemesinin Kurulu\u015fu ve Yarg\u0131lama Usulleri Hakk\u0131nda Kanun\u2019un 50. maddesinin (2) numaral\u0131 f\u0131kras\u0131nda d\u00fczenlenen bireysel ba\u015fvuruya \u00f6zg\u00fc yeniden yarg\u0131lama kurumunun \u00f6zelliklerine ili\u015fkin kapsaml\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131klamalar i\u00e7in bkz. Mehmet Do\u011fan [GK], B. No: 2014\/8875, 7\/6\/2018, \u00a7\u00a7 54-60; Alig\u00fcl Alkaya ve di\u011ferleri (2) [1. B.], 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
72. \u0130hlalin ve sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in ihlalin tespitinin ve yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n yeterli giderim sa\u011flayaca\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan tazminat talebinin reddine karar verilmesi gerekir. Anayasa Mahkemesinin maddi tazminata h\u00fckmedebilmesi i\u00e7in ba\u015fvurucunun u\u011frad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 iddia etti\u011fi maddi zarar ile tespit edilen ihlal aras\u0131nda illiyet ba\u011f\u0131 bulunmal\u0131d\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucunun bu konuda herhangi bir belge sunmamas\u0131 nedeniyle maddi tazminat talebinin reddine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
VII. H\u00dcK\u00dcM<\/p>\n
A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle;<\/p>\n
A. 1. \u00d6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n KABUL ED\u0130LEB\u0130L\u0130R OLDU\u011eUNA,<\/p>\n
2. Makul s\u00fcrede yarg\u0131lanma 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
B. Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 20. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130HLAL ED\u0130LD\u0130\u011e\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
C. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlalinin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmak \u00fczere Ankara 11. \u0130dare Mahkemesine (E.2017\/3208, K.2018\/1158; E.2017\/3209, K.2018\/1928) G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
D. Ba\u015fvurucunun tazminat taleplerinin REDD\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
E. 729,20 TL ba\u015fvuru harc\u0131ndan olu\u015fan yarg\u0131lama giderinin ba\u015fvurucuya \u00d6DENMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
F. \u00d6demenin karar\u0131n tebli\u011fini takiben ba\u015fvurucunun Hazine ve Maliye Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na ba\u015fvuru tarihinden itibaren d\u00f6rt ay i\u00e7inde yap\u0131lmas\u0131na, \u00f6demede gecikme olmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde bu s\u00fcrenin sona erdi\u011fi tarihten \u00f6deme tarihine kadar ge\u00e7en s\u00fcre i\u00e7in yasal FA\u0130Z UYGULANMASINA,<\/p>\n
G. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE 12\/12\/2024 tarihinde OYB\u0130RL\u0130\u011e\u0130YLE karar verildi.<\/p>\n
\u200bAnayasa Mahkemesi’nin 12\/12\/2024 tarihli ve 2019\/2675 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 GENEL KURUL \u00a0 KARAR \u00a0 AHMET ATA UZUNER BA\u015eVURUSU (Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2019\/2675) \u00a0 Karar Tarihi: 12\/12\/2024 R.G. Tarih ve Say\u0131: 5\/5\/2025 – 32891 \u00a0 GENEL KURUL \u00a0 KARAR \u00a0 Ba\u015fkan : Kadir \u00d6ZKAYA Ba\u015fkanvekili : Hasan Tahsin G\u00d6KCAN Ba\u015fkanvekili : Basri BA\u011eCI \u00dcyeler : Engin YILDIRIM \u00a0 \u00a0 R\u0131dvan G\u00dcLE\u00c7 \u00a0 \u00a0 Recai AKYEL \u00a0 \u00a0 Yusuf \u015eevki HAKYEMEZ \u00a0 \u00a0 Y\u0131ld\u0131z SEFER\u0130NO\u011eLU \u00a0 \u00a0 Selahaddin MENTE\u015e \u00a0 \u00a0 \u0130rfan F\u0130DAN \u00a0 \u00a0 Kenan YA\u015eAR \u00a0 \u00a0 Muhterem \u0130NCE \u00a0 \u00a0 Y\u0131lmaz AK\u00c7\u0130L \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00d6mer \u00c7INAR \u00a0 \u00a0 Metin KIRATLI Raport\u00f6r : Y\u00fccel ARSLAN Ba\u015fvurucu : Ahmet Ata UZUNER \u00a0 I. BA\u015eVURUNUN KONUSU 1. Ba\u015fvuru, h\u00e2kimlik mesle\u011finden \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lan ki\u015finin noterli\u011fe atamas\u0131n\u0131n yap\u0131lmamas\u0131 nedeniyle \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir. II. BA\u015eVURU S\u00dcREC\u0130 2. Ba\u015fvurular 15\/1\/2019 ve 14\/3\/2019 tarihlerinde yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. 3. 2019\/9133 numaral\u0131 ba\u015fvuru dosyas\u0131n\u0131n konu ve ki\u015fi y\u00f6n\u00fcnden hukuki irtibat\u0131 nedeniyle 2019\/2675 numaral\u0131 ba\u015fvuru dosyas\u0131 ile birle\u015ftirilmesine, incelemenin 2019\/2675 numaral\u0131 ba\u015fvuru dosyas\u0131 \u00fczerinden y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclmesine karar verilmi\u015ftir. 4. Komisyon ba\u015fvurular\u0131n kabul edilebilirlik ve esas incelemesinin birlikte yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir. Birinci B\u00f6l\u00fcm, ba\u015fvurunun Genel Kurul taraf\u0131ndan incelenmesine karar vermi\u015ftir. 5. Ba\u015fvuru belgelerinin bir \u00f6rne\u011fi bilgi i\u00e7in Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na (Bakanl\u0131k) g\u00f6nderilmi\u015ftir. Bakanl\u0131k, g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fc bildirmi\u015ftir. …<\/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-76593","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n