T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CUMHUR\u0130YET\u0130<\/p>\n
ANAYASA MAHKEMES\u0130<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
KARAR<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
AY\u015eE DERYA OK\u00c7EL\u0130K VE D\u0130\u011eERLER\u0130 BA\u015eVURUSU<\/p>\n
(Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2020\/20048)<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Karar Tarihi: 12\/6\/2024<\/p>\n
\u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
KARAR<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fkan<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Basri BA\u011eCI<\/p>\n
\u00dcyeler<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Engin YILDIRIM<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
R\u0131dvan G\u00dcLE\u00c7<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Kenan YA\u015eAR<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00d6mer \u00c7INAR<\/p>\n
Raport\u00f6r<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
M\u00fccahit AYDIN<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fvurucular<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
1. Ay\u015fe Derya OK\u00c7EL\u0130K<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
2. B\u00fclent G\u00dcLTEK\u0130N<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
3. \u00c7a\u011flayan DEVR\u0130M<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
4. \u00c7i\u011fdem AK\u00c7URA<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
5. Dilek ZEYBEK G\u00d6KER<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
6. Emel \u00c7AM<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
7. Emsal Can CANKO\u00c7AK<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
8. G\u00fcl\u015fen YILDIZ<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
9. Hasan Ayhan AK\u00c7URA<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
10. Hatice Meftun HAZIROL<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
11. H\u00fclya BABALIO\u011eLU<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
12. Leyla ARICI<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
13. Makbule \u00d6ZDEN<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
14. Mine YOLA\u00c7AN<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
15. Murat K\u00fcr\u015fat YILDIRIM<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
16. Nesrin DURMU\u015e ALT\u00dcRK<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
17. \u00d6mer ERC\u0130YES<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
18. Pamir Nihat TEKER<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
19. Sevin\u00e7 YAPICI<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
20. Sonia Josepha Lea D’HONDT EREM<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
21. T\u00fcmay TEKER<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
22. Zeynep FIRATLI YILDIRIM<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
23. Z\u00fchal OKUYAN<\/p>\n
Vekili<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Av. Cem ALTIPARMAK<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130<\/p>\n
1. Ba\u015fvuru, Karaburun R\u00fczgar Enerji Santrali Projesi i\u00e7in verilen \u00e7evresel etki de\u011ferlendirmesi (\u00c7ED) olumlu karar\u0131n\u0131n iptali talebiyle a\u00e7\u0131lan davan\u0131n reddedilmesi nedeniyle \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
2. \u0130zmir ili Karaburun il\u00e7esinde bulunan Pirenli Da\u011f\u0131, Kurkaya Tepe, Yaylad\u00fcz\u00fc, De\u011firmentepe, \u00c7ataltepe, M\u0131n\u0131sl\u0131 mevkilerini i\u00e7eren b\u00f6lgede \u00f6zel bir \u015firket taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lmas\u0131 planlanan Karaburun R\u00fczgar Enerji Santrali Projesi (Proje) ile ilgili olarak verilen 27\/2\/2018 tarihli \u00c7ED raporunun iptali istemiyle idari yarg\u0131da dava a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucular dava dilek\u00e7esinde; \u00c7ED raporunda Projenin \u00e7evreye k\u00fcm\u00fclatif etkilerinin bilimsel olarak de\u011ferlendirilmedi\u011fini, Proje nedeniyle civardaki koruma alt\u0131ndaki t\u00fcrlerin ve fauna t\u00fcrlerinin olumsuz etkilenece\u011fini ve \u00e7e\u015fitli ku\u015f t\u00fcrlerinin yok olabilece\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Ba\u015fvurucular ayr\u0131ca Proje nedeniyle tar\u0131m alanlar\u0131n\u0131n, meralar\u0131n ve zeytinliklerin zarar g\u00f6rece\u011fini, b\u00f6lgenin ge\u00e7im kayna\u011f\u0131 olan hayvanc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n da olumsuz etkilenece\u011fini belirtmi\u015flerdir.<\/p>\n
3. \u0130zmir 3. \u0130dare Mahkemesince (Mahkeme) uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k konusuyla ilgili olarak ke\u015fif ve bilirki\u015fi incelemesi yapt\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir. Bilirki\u015fi raporunda; yap\u0131lmas\u0131 planlanan t\u00fcrbinlerden dokuz adedinin b\u00f6lgenin floristik yap\u0131s\u0131na ve buna ba\u011fl\u0131 olarak ya\u015fam s\u00fcren fauna yap\u0131s\u0131na zarar verece\u011fi, ayn\u0131 t\u00fcrbinlerin g\u00f6\u00e7men ve y\u0131rt\u0131c\u0131 ku\u015flar\u0131n b\u00f6lgeyi kullanmalar\u0131n\u0131 engelleyece\u011finden ornitolojik a\u00e7\u0131dan sorun te\u015fkil edece\u011fi, ayr\u0131ca ormanc\u0131l\u0131k faaliyetleri a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan bir \u00e7ok eksikli\u011fin bulundu\u011fu \u00c7ED raporunun uygun olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 m\u00fctalaa edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
4. Mahkeme karar\u0131nda, yap\u0131lmas\u0131 planlanan yirmi sekiz t\u00fcrbin alan\u0131n\u0131n flora yap\u0131s\u0131 ve ornitolojik a\u00e7\u0131dan uygun \u00f6zellikte olmas\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131n do\u011fu b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcnde bulunan dokuz adet t\u00fcrbinin b\u00f6lgedeki flora yap\u0131s\u0131 ile ku\u015f ya\u015fam\u0131na ve habitat alanlar\u0131na zarar verebilece\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir. Mahkeme bu do\u011frultuda dokuz adet t\u00fcrbin alan\u0131n\u0131n flora yap\u0131s\u0131 ve ornitolojik a\u00e7\u0131dan uygun olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle \u00c7ED raporunu hukuka uygun bulmam\u0131\u015f ve iptal etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
5. Karar\u0131n temyiz edilmesi \u00fczerine Dan\u0131\u015ftay Alt\u0131nc\u0131 Dairesi (Daire) temyiz isteminin kabul\u00fcne, karar\u0131n bozulmas\u0131na ve davan\u0131n kesin olarak reddine karar vermi\u015ftir. Karar\u0131n gerek\u00e7esinde; bilirki\u015fi raporunda flora yap\u0131s\u0131 ve ornitolojik a\u00e7\u0131dan eksik ve \u00e7eli\u015fkili de\u011ferlendirmeler yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, bu hususlara ili\u015fkin \u00c7ED raporundaki \u00f6nlem ve taahh\u00fctlerin de\u011ferlendirilmedi\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir. Bu \u00e7er\u00e7evede, bilirki\u015fi raporunda Projenin \u00e7evre \u00fczerindeki etkilerinin al\u0131nacak \u00f6nlemler sonucunda ilgili mevzuat ve bilimsel esaslara g\u00f6re kabul edilebilir d\u00fczeylerde olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n somut ve bilimsel verilerle ortaya konulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ifade edilmi\u015ftir. Daire, flora yap\u0131s\u0131 ve ornitolojik a\u00e7\u0131dan yap\u0131lan de\u011ferlendirmelerin \u00c7ED raporunu kusurland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 nitelikte olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve \u00c7ED raporunda Projenin olumsuz \u00e7evre etkilerinin en aza indirilmesi i\u00e7in \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen \u00f6nlemlerin bilimsel esaslara g\u00f6re yeterli oldu\u011fu sonucuna varm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
6. Ba\u015fvurucular vekili nihai h\u00fckm\u00fc 7\/6\/2020 tarihinde \u00f6\u011frendikten sonra 14\/7\/2020 tarihinde bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
7. Komisyonca ba\u015fvurunun kabul edilebilirlik ve esas incelemesinin B\u00f6l\u00fcm taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
II. DE\u011eERLEND\u0130RME<\/p>\n
8. Ba\u015fvurucular; Projenin do\u011fal ya\u015fam\u0131 h\u0131zla ve geri d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015fs\u00fcz bir \u015fekilde yok etti\u011fini, tar\u0131m ve mera alanlar\u0131n\u0131n k\u0131s\u0131tl\u0131 oldu\u011fu b\u00f6lgede yerel halk\u0131n ge\u00e7im kayna\u011f\u0131 olan tar\u0131m ve hayvanc\u0131l\u0131\u011fa b\u00fcy\u00fck zarar verdi\u011fini, toz ve g\u00fcr\u00fclt\u00fc kirlili\u011finin insan ve yaban hayat\u0131 \u00fczerinde ciddi olumsuz etkileri oldu\u011funu belirtmi\u015flerdir. Ba\u015fvurucular ayr\u0131ca uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcm\u00fcn\u00fcn teknik bilgiye dayal\u0131 oldu\u011funu, dosyan\u0131n temyiz a\u015famas\u0131nda bozulmas\u0131 \u00fczerine yeni bilirki\u015fi incelemesi yapt\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fini ifade etmi\u015flerdir. Kesin olarak verilen Dan\u0131\u015ftay karar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 karar d\u00fczeltme yolunun kapal\u0131 olmas\u0131 nedeniyle karar\u0131n hukuki denetimine imk\u00e2n verilmedi\u011finden de yak\u0131nan ba\u015fvurucular hukuk devleti ilkesinin, etkili ba\u015fvuru hakk\u0131n\u0131n, adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ve ki\u015finin maddi ve manevi varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 koruma ve geli\u015ftirme hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015flerdir. Bakanl\u0131k g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnde, ba\u015fvurunun kabul edilebilirli\u011fine dair yap\u0131lacak incelemede ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n iddialar\u0131n\u0131n kanun yolu \u015fik\u00e2yeti niteli\u011finde olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 hususunun dikkate al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir. Esasa ili\u015fkin incelemede ise Anayasa ve ilgili mevuzat h\u00fck\u00fcmleri, Anayasa Mahkemesi i\u00e7tihad\u0131 ve somut olay\u0131n kendine \u00f6zg\u00fc ko\u015fullar\u0131n\u0131n da dikkate al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi ifade edilmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucular, Bakanl\u0131k g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne kar\u015f\u0131 beyanda bulunmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
9. 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 (Tahir Canan, B. No: 2012\/969, 18\/9\/2013, \u00a7 16). Ba\u015fvuru ihlal iddialar\u0131n\u0131n mahiyeti gere\u011fi \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda incelenmesi uygun g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr (benzer y\u00f6ndeki bir karar i\u00e7in bkz. Ahmet Bilgin ve di\u011ferleri, B. No: 2015\/11709, 12\/12\/2018, \u00a7 51).<\/p>\n
10. Somut ba\u015fvuru a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan de\u011ferlendirilmesi gereken ilk husus, ba\u015fvuruya konu \u00e7evresel etkinin Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 20. maddesi kapsam\u0131ndaki g\u00fcvenceleri harekete ge\u00e7irecek asgari a\u011f\u0131rl\u0131kta olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131d\u0131r. Bu kapsamda ilgili tesis, i\u015fletme veya sair faaliyet sonucu ortaya \u00e7\u0131kan \u00e7evresel etkiler ile ba\u015fvurucunun \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131 aras\u0131nda s\u0131k\u0131 bir ba\u011f\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 yeterlidir (Mehmet Kurt, B. No: 2013\/2552, 25\/2\/2016, \u00a7 70; Ahmet \u0130smail Onat, B. No: 2013\/6714, 21\/4\/2016, \u00a7 84; H\u00fcseyin Tun\u00e7 Karl\u0131k ve Zahide \u015eadan Karluk, B. No: 2013\/6587, 24\/3\/2016, \u00a7 68). Ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n, \u00c7ED olumlu karar\u0131 verilen Projenin yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 b\u00f6lgede ikamet ettikleri ve tar\u0131m ve hayvanc\u0131l\u0131kla u\u011fra\u015ft\u0131klar\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla an\u0131lan Projenin ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131na y\u00f6nelik etkisinin Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 20. maddesi kapsam\u0131nda de\u011ferlendirilmesi gerekmektedir.<\/p>\n
11. 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 ba\u015fvurunun kabul edilebilir oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir. <\/p>\n
12. Somut olayda ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n iddialar\u0131 devletin \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131 etkili olarak koruma ve sayg\u0131 g\u00f6sterme \u015feklinde bulunan pozitif y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc kapsam\u0131nda incelenmi\u015ftir. \u00c7evresel meseleler ba\u011flam\u0131nda devletin usule ili\u015fkin y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fckleri daha \u00f6nce Anayasa Mahkemesinin \u00e7e\u015fitli kararlar\u0131nda ortaya konulmu\u015ftur. Buna g\u00f6re muhtemel olumsuz \u00e7evresel etkilerin \u00f6nlenmesi veya en aza indirilmesi amac\u0131n\u0131n ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilebilmesi i\u00e7in s\u00fcrece d\u00e2hil olan s\u00f6z konusu taraflar\u0131n menfaatlerinin titizlikle de\u011ferlendirilmesi, bu de\u011ferlendirmenin sa\u011fl\u0131kl\u0131 \u015fekilde yap\u0131labilmesi i\u00e7in de ilgili taraflar\u0131n s\u00fcrece etkin kat\u0131l\u0131m\u0131n\u0131n sa\u011flanmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi tart\u0131\u015fmas\u0131zd\u0131r (Mehmet Kurt, \u00a7\u00a7 61-66; Ahmet \u0130smail Onat, \u00a7\u00a7 79-81; Fevzi Kayacan (2), B. No: 2013\/2513, 21\/4\/2016, \u00a7\u00a7 56-61; H\u00fcseyin Tun\u00e7 Karl\u0131k ve Zahide \u015eadan Karluk,\u00a7\u00a7 64, 65; Ahmet Bilgin ve Di\u011ferleri, B. No: 2015\/11709, 12\/12\/2018, \u00a7 56). Bu do\u011frultuda an\u0131lan anayasal g\u00fcvenceleri g\u00f6zeten bir yarg\u0131lama s\u00fcreci y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclmesi ve neticede ula\u015f\u0131lan sonucun konuyla ilgili ve yeterli gerek\u00e7elerle a\u00e7\u0131klanmas\u0131 gerekir.<\/p>\n
13. Ba\u015fvuruya konu Projeye verilen iznin \u00fclkenin ekonomik yarar\u0131na ili\u015fkin kamu yarar\u0131na dayal\u0131 me\u015fru bir amaca y\u00f6nelik oldu\u011fu a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n iddialar\u0131n\u0131n temeli, Proje nedeniyle \u00e7evrenin ve yaban hayat\u0131n\u0131n zarar g\u00f6rece\u011fi, tar\u0131m ve hayvanc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n olumsuz etkilenece\u011fine dayanmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
14. Somut olayda ilk derecesi mahkemesi taraf\u0131ndan ke\u015fif ve bilirki\u015fi incelemesi yapt\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015f ve bilirki\u015fi raporu h\u00fckme esas al\u0131narak \u00c7ED raporunun iptaline karar verilmi\u015ftir. Temyiz incelemesinde ise bilirki\u015fi raporunun eksik ve \u00e7eli\u015fkili de\u011ferlendirmeler i\u00e7erdi\u011fi, \u00c7ED raporunda yer alan \u00f6nlem ve taahh\u00fctlerin irdelenmedi\u011fi ve Projenin \u00e7evre \u00fczerindeki etkilerinin bilimsel ve somut verilerle ortaya konulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 belirtilmi\u015ftir. Bu kapsamda bilirki\u015fi raporunun h\u00fckme dayanak al\u0131nacak yeterlilikte olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve \u00c7ED raporunda \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen \u00f6nlemlerin bilimsel esaslara uygun oldu\u011fu sonucuna var\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Buna kar\u015f\u0131n Daire karar\u0131nda uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcm\u00fc i\u00e7in teknik incelemeye gerek olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnde bir tespit yap\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. Bunun yan\u0131nda, yetersiz g\u00f6r\u00fclen bilirki\u015fi raporundaki eksikliklerin tamamlat\u0131lmas\u0131 yoluna gidilmedi\u011fi gibi bu durumun sebebinin de izah edilmedi\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir.<\/p>\n
15. Ba\u015fvurucular dava konusu i\u015fleme y\u00f6nelik farkl\u0131 ba\u015fl\u0131klar alt\u0131nda ve teknik bilgiye dayal\u0131 \u00e7e\u015fitli iddialar ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015flerdir. Daire karar\u0131nda ise ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcm\u00fc i\u00e7in esasl\u0131 olan ve teknik bilgiye dayal\u0131 iddialar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k i\u015flemin neden hukuka uygun g\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc y\u00f6n\u00fcnde makul ve kabul edilebilir bir gerek\u00e7e sunulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, olay\u0131n niteli\u011fine uygun, ayr\u0131nt\u0131l\u0131 ve yeterli bir yan\u0131t verilmedi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. \u00c7ED raporunun Projenin \u00e7evreye etkilerinin de\u011ferlendirildi\u011fi teknik konular i\u00e7erdi\u011fi, bilirki\u015fi incelemelerinin ise an\u0131lan raporun uygunlu\u011funu denetlemeye elveri\u015fli bir yol oldu\u011fu hususu ile \u00e7evrenin korunmas\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcndeki devletin pozitif y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc birlikte de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde, konunun \u00f6nemini g\u00f6zeten \u00f6zenli bir yarg\u0131laman\u0131n yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 dolay\u0131s\u0131yla pozitif y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn yerine getirildi\u011fi s\u00f6ylenemez.<\/p>\n
16. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle Anayasa’n\u0131n 20. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
III. G\u0130DER\u0130M<\/p>\n
17. Ba\u015fvurucular, ihlalin tespiti ve yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmas\u0131 talebinde bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
18. 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 (Mehmet Do\u011fan [GK], B. No: 2014\/8875, 7\/6\/2018, \u00a7\u00a7 54-60; Alig\u00fcl Alkaya ve di\u011ferleri (2), B. No: 2016\/12506, 7\/11\/2019, \u00a7\u00a7 53-60, 66; Kadri Enis Berbero\u011flu (3) [GK], B. No: 2020\/32949, 21\/1\/2021, \u00a7\u00a7 93-100).<\/p>\n
IV. H\u00dcK\u00dcM<\/p>\n
A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle;<\/p>\n
A. \u00d6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n KABUL ED\u0130LEB\u0130L\u0130R 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 Dan\u0131\u015ftay Alt\u0131nc\u0131 Dairesine (E.2019\/19280, K.2020\/1084) iletilmek \u00fczere \u0130zmir 3. \u0130dare Mahkemesine (E.2018\/491, K.2019\/1000) G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
D. 446,90 TL har\u00e7 ve 18.800 TL vek\u00e2let \u00fccretinden olu\u015fan toplam 19.246,90 TL yarg\u0131lama giderinin ba\u015fvuruculara M\u00dc\u015eTEREKEN \u00d6DENMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
E. \u00d6demelerin karar\u0131n tebli\u011fini takiben ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n Hazine ve Maliye Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na ba\u015fvuru tarihinden itibaren d\u00f6rt ay i\u00e7inde yap\u0131lmas\u0131na, \u00f6demede gecikme olmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde bu s\u00fcrenin sona erdi\u011fi tarihten \u00f6deme tarihine kadar ge\u00e7en s\u00fcre i\u00e7in yasal FA\u0130Z UYGULANMASINA,<\/p>\n
F. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE 12\/6\/2024 tarihinde OYB\u0130RL\u0130\u011e\u0130YLE karar verildi.<\/p>\n
\u200bAnayasa Mahkemesi’nin 12\/6\/2024 tarihli ve 2020\/20048 ba\u015fvuru numaral\u0131 karar\u0131\u00a0Hukuki Haber<\/p>\n
Haberin Al\u0131nt\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131 Kaynak: www.hukukihaber.net<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CUMHUR\u0130YET\u0130 ANAYASA MAHKEMES\u0130 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM \u00a0 KARAR \u00a0 AY\u015eE DERYA OK\u00c7EL\u0130K VE D\u0130\u011eERLER\u0130 BA\u015eVURUSU (Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2020\/20048) \u00a0 Karar Tarihi: 12\/6\/2024 \u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM \u00a0 KARAR \u00a0 \u00a0 Ba\u015fkan : Basri BA\u011eCI \u00dcyeler : Engin YILDIRIM \u00a0 \u00a0 R\u0131dvan G\u00dcLE\u00c7 \u00a0 \u00a0 Kenan YA\u015eAR \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00d6mer \u00c7INAR Raport\u00f6r : M\u00fccahit AYDIN Ba\u015fvurucular : 1. Ay\u015fe Derya OK\u00c7EL\u0130K \u00a0 \u00a0 2. B\u00fclent G\u00dcLTEK\u0130N \u00a0 \u00a0 3. \u00c7a\u011flayan DEVR\u0130M \u00a0 \u00a0 4. \u00c7i\u011fdem AK\u00c7URA \u00a0 \u00a0 5. Dilek ZEYBEK G\u00d6KER \u00a0 \u00a0 6. Emel \u00c7AM \u00a0 \u00a0 7. Emsal Can CANKO\u00c7AK \u00a0 \u00a0 8. G\u00fcl\u015fen YILDIZ \u00a0 \u00a0 9. Hasan Ayhan AK\u00c7URA \u00a0 \u00a0 10. Hatice Meftun HAZIROL \u00a0 \u00a0 11. H\u00fclya BABALIO\u011eLU \u00a0 \u00a0 12. Leyla ARICI \u00a0 \u00a0 13. Makbule \u00d6ZDEN \u00a0 \u00a0 14. Mine YOLA\u00c7AN \u00a0 \u00a0 15. Murat K\u00fcr\u015fat YILDIRIM \u00a0 \u00a0 16. Nesrin DURMU\u015e ALT\u00dcRK \u00a0 \u00a0 17. \u00d6mer ERC\u0130YES \u00a0 \u00a0 18. Pamir Nihat TEKER \u00a0 \u00a0 19. Sevin\u00e7 YAPICI \u00a0 \u00a0 20. Sonia Josepha Lea D’HONDT EREM \u00a0 \u00a0 21. T\u00fcmay TEKER \u00a0 \u00a0 22. Zeynep FIRATLI YILDIRIM \u00a0 \u00a0 23. Z\u00fchal OKUYAN Vekili : Av. Cem ALTIPARMAK \u00a0 I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130 1. Ba\u015fvuru, Karaburun R\u00fczgar Enerji Santrali Projesi i\u00e7in verilen \u00e7evresel …<\/p>","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[27],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-24638","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n