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
K. O. BA\u015eVURUSU<\/p>\n
(Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2021\/59876)<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Karar Tarihi: 27\/11\/2024<\/p>\n
\u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
KARAR<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
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
Burak G\u00dcNG\u00d6R<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fvurucu<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Vekili<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Av. Murat YILMAZ<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130<\/p>\n
1. Ba\u015fvuru, ceza davas\u0131nda esasl\u0131 iddia ve savunmalar\u0131n gerek\u00e7ede de\u011ferlendirilmemesi nedeniyle adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
2. 2010 y\u0131l\u0131nda yap\u0131lan Kamu Personeli Se\u00e7me S\u0131nav\u0131na (KPSS) ili\u015fkin ba\u015flat\u0131lan bir soru\u015fturmada beyan\u0131na ba\u015fvurulan, 100 ve \u00fczeri do\u011fru yap\u0131p 3227 \u015f\u00fcpheli aras\u0131nda bulunan \u015f\u00fcpheli Y.K. m\u00fcdafii huzurundaki soru\u015fturma evresinde verdi\u011fi ifadesinde ba\u015fvurucunun e\u015finin KPSS sorular\u0131n\u0131 kendine verdi\u011fi y\u00f6n\u00fcnde beyanda bulunmas\u0131; ba\u015fvurucunun an\u0131lan s\u0131navda y\u00fcksek ba\u015far\u0131 g\u00f6stermi\u015f olmas\u0131 ve 2004 ile 2010 y\u0131llar\u0131 aras\u0131nda \u00f6rg\u00fctle iltisakl\u0131 kurumlarda \u00f6\u011fretmenlik yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 tespitleri \u00fczerine ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda Ankara Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 (Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k) taraf\u0131ndan Fetullah\u00e7\u0131 Ter\u00f6r \u00d6rg\u00fct\u00fc\/Paralel Devlet Yap\u0131lanmas\u0131na (FET\u00d6\/PDY) \u00fcye olma ve di\u011fer su\u00e7lardan soru\u015fturma ba\u015flat\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
3. Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n 11\/11\/2016 tarihli iddianamesi ile aralar\u0131nda ba\u015fvurucunun da oldu\u011fu baz\u0131 \u015f\u00fcpheliler hakk\u0131nda FET\u00d6\/PDY \u00fcyesi olma, resm\u00ee belgede sahtecilik ve kamu kurum ve kurulu\u015flar\u0131 zarar\u0131na doland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k su\u00e7lar\u0131ndan kamu davas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
4. Ankara 2. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesinde (Mahkeme) g\u00f6r\u00fclen yarg\u0131lama sonucunda ba\u015fvurucunun FET\u00d6\/PDY \u00fcyesi olma su\u00e7unu i\u015fledi\u011fi sonucuna var\u0131larak mahk\u00fbmiyetine, di\u011fer su\u00e7lar y\u00f6n\u00fcnden ise beraatine karar verilmi\u015ftir. Gerek\u00e7eli kararda mahk\u00fbmiyete temel olarak ba\u015fvurucunun \u00f6rg\u00fcte m\u00fczahir e\u011fitim kurumlar\u0131nda \u00e7al\u0131\u015fm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131na, 2010 y\u0131l\u0131nda ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilen KPPS’de 120 sorudan 110 do\u011fru yap\u0131p tekrarlanan s\u0131nava girmemi\u015f olmas\u0131na, bahse konu ilk s\u0131navda 120 sorudan 116’s\u0131na do\u011fru cevap veren e\u015fi ile ayn\u0131 yanl\u0131\u015f \u015f\u0131kta birle\u015fmesine ve e\u015finin s\u0131navdan \u00f6nce sorular\u0131 \u00f6rg\u00fct \u00fcyesi olan ve sonradan etkin pi\u015fmanl\u0131ktan yararlanan konuma ge\u00e7en Y.K.ya verdi\u011fine ili\u015fkin tan\u0131k beyan\u0131na yer verilmi\u015ftir. Gerek\u00e7eli karar\u0131n ilgili k\u0131sm\u0131 \u015f\u00f6yledir:<\/p>\n
“Bu S\u0131n\u0131f \u00d6\u011fretmenli\u011fi B\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcnden mezun olan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n, SGK verilerine g\u00f6re; 2004-2005 y\u0131llar\u0131 aras\u0131nda … 2005-2010 y\u0131llar\u0131 aras\u0131nda … \u0130simli firmalarda \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 tespit edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
2005-2010 y\u0131llar\u0131 aras\u0131nda (1) kez KPSS’ye girdi\u011fi, bu s\u0131navda;<\/p>\n
E\u011fitim Bilimleri Testinde; 10.07.2010 tarihinde d\u00fczenlenen ve iptal edilen KPSS E\u011fitim Bilimleri Testinde (120) sorudan (110) soruyu do\u011fru cevaplad\u0131\u011f\u0131, 31.10.2010 tarihinde tekrarlanan E\u011fitim Bilimleri Testine girmedi\u011fi,<\/p>\n
Genel Yetenek Testine; 2005-2010 y\u0131llar\u0131 aras\u0131nda (1) kez girdi\u011fi, 2010 y\u0131l\u0131nda (60) sorudan (54) soruyu do\u011fru cevaplad\u0131\u011f\u0131,<\/p>\n
Genel K\u00fclt\u00fcr Testine; 2005-2010 y\u0131llar\u0131 aras\u0131nda (1) kez girdi\u011fi, bu s\u0131navlarda; 2010 y\u0131l\u0131nda (60) sorudan (45) soruyu do\u011fru cevaplad\u0131\u011f\u0131 tespit edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Genel Yetenek Testinin 39 numaral\u0131 sorusunda Kudret Orak’\u0131n e\u015fi [P.O.] ile birlikte ayn\u0131 yanl\u0131\u015f \u015f\u0131kta birle\u015fti\u011fi ve [P.O.] da 120 soruda 116 do\u011fru cevap i\u015faretledi\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
2010 KPSS’de 100 ve \u00fczeri do\u011fru yap\u0131p 3227 \u015f\u00fcpheli aras\u0131nda bulunan ve y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclen soru\u015fturma kapsam\u0131nda 24.08.2016 tarihinde tutuklanan [Y.K.] isimli \u015fahs\u0131n al\u0131nan m\u00fcdafii huzurundaki ifadesinde \u00f6zetle s\u0131navdan yakla\u015f\u0131k 2-3 g\u00fcn \u00f6nce evinde oturmakta iken ak\u015fam \u00fczeri … isimli firmadan tan\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131 [P.O.] (Kudret Orak’\u0131n e\u015fi) isimli \u015fah\u0131s\u0131n geldi\u011fini, bir s\u00fcre sohbet ettikten sonra elinde 3 g\u00fcn sonra yap\u0131lacak s\u0131navda \u00e7\u0131kma ihtimali olan sorular\u0131n bulundu\u011funu s\u00f6yledi\u011fini, kimse ile payla\u015fmamas\u0131 konusunda tekrar uyard\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, ilk etapta \u0130mam Hatip ge\u00e7mi\u015fi oldu\u011fu i\u00e7in kendisini k\u00f6t\u00fc hissetti\u011fini, almak istemedi\u011fini, bu durumun uygun olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 sordu\u011funu, onunda -biz sonu\u00e7ta Allah r\u0131zas\u0131 i\u00e7in bu olu\u015fumun i\u00e7indeyiz, almam\u0131zda s\u0131k\u0131nta olmaz- dedi\u011fini, teredd\u00fct ya\u015famas\u0131na ra\u011fmen … gaflette bulunarak kabul etti\u011fini, kendisine getirilen i\u00e7erisinde 2010 KPSS s\u0131nav sorular\u0131n\u0131n bulundu\u011fu tam olarak hat\u0131rlamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ancak 7-8 sayfa oldu\u011funu d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnd\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc tek sayfa \u00fczerinde kitap\u00e7\u0131\u011fa ait iki sayfan\u0131n bulundu\u011fu belgeleri ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, bu belgeleri incelendi\u011finde i\u00e7erisinde tamam\u0131 olmamakla birlikte E\u011fitim Bilimleri sorular\u0131 ile Genel K\u00fclt\u00fcr ve Genel Yetenek sorular\u0131n\u0131n b\u00fcy\u00fck \u00e7o\u011funlu\u011funun oldu\u011funu g\u00f6rd\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc, baz\u0131 sorular\u0131n \u00fczerlerinde cevap \u015f\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n i\u015faretlenmi\u015f oldu\u011funu, baz\u0131 sorularda da cevap \u015f\u0131klar\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan kendisi \u00e7al\u0131\u015farak \u00e7\u00f6zd\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc, s\u0131nav g\u00fcn\u00fc sorular\u0131 g\u00f6rd\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnde \u00e7ok \u015fa\u015f\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, kendisine verilen sorular\u0131n y\u00fczde y\u00fcz ayn\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n \u00e7\u0131kaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 beklemedi\u011fini belirtti\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
… san\u0131\u011f\u0131n s\u0131nav \u00f6ncesi \u00f6rg\u00fct taraf\u0131ndan kendisine verilen sorulara \u00e7al\u0131\u015farak s\u0131navda ger\u00e7ek ba\u015far\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n \u00fczerinde performans g\u00f6sterdi\u011fi, s\u0131nav sorular\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6nceden alarak hileli hareketlerle s\u0131navda ger\u00e7ek ba\u015far\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n \u00fczerinde performans g\u00f6sterip s\u0131ralamada di\u011fer adaylar\u0131n \u00f6n\u00fcne ge\u00e7ti\u011fi, y\u00fcksek ba\u015far\u0131s\u0131na ra\u011fmen tekrarlanan s\u0131nava girmedi\u011fi, \u00f6ncesinde de san\u0131\u011f\u0131n irtibatl\u0131 kurumda \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lmakla san\u0131\u011f\u0131n 2010 y\u0131l\u0131 KPSS s\u0131nav sorular\u0131n\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc vas\u0131tas\u0131yla \u00f6nceden ald\u0131\u011f\u0131, bunun da ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc \u00fcyesi oldu\u011funu g\u00f6sterdi\u011fi kabul edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
San\u0131k hakk\u0131nda resm\u00ee belgede sahtecilik ve kamu kurumu aleyhine doland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k su\u00e7lar\u0131ndan kamu davas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ise de… san\u0131\u011f\u0131n s\u0131nav tarihinde memur olmamas\u0131 nedeniyle i\u00e7erik sahtecili\u011finin faili olamayaca\u011f\u0131, dolay\u0131s\u0131yla sahtecilik su\u00e7unun unsurlar\u0131 itibariyle olu\u015fmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, yine bu s\u0131nav sonucu her hangi bir g\u00f6reve atanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 bu nedenle de doland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k su\u00e7unu i\u015flemedi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lmakla at\u0131l\u0131 bu iki su\u00e7tan beraatine karar verilmi\u015ftir.”<\/p>\n
5. Ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131ndaki h\u00fck\u00fcm, istinaf ve temyiz kanun yollar\u0131ndan ge\u00e7erek kesinle\u015fmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
6. Ba\u015fvurucu, nihai karardan sonra s\u00fcresinde bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
7. Komisyon, gerek\u00e7eli karar ile hakkaniyete uygun yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki iddialar\u0131n kabul edilemez oldu\u011funa, an\u0131lan haklara ili\u015fkin \u015fik\u00e2yetin kabul edilebilirlik incelemesinin B\u00f6l\u00fcm taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
II. DE\u011eERLEND\u0130RME<\/p>\n
8. \u00d6deme g\u00fcc\u00fcnden yoksun oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lan ba\u015fvurucunun adli yard\u0131m talebinin kabul\u00fcne karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
A. Gerek\u00e7eli Karar Hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130hlal Edildi\u011fine \u0130li\u015fkin \u0130ddia<\/p>\n
9. Ba\u015fvurucu; i\u015flendi\u011fi tarihte su\u00e7 olarak kabul edilmeyen fiillere dayan\u0131larak cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011funu, bu y\u00f6ndeki iddia ve itirazlar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 yarg\u0131 mercilerince yeterli a\u00e7\u0131klamalara yer verilmedi\u011fini belirterek gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
10. Ba\u015fvurucunun iddialar\u0131n\u0131n adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden incelenmesi gerekti\u011fi de\u011ferlendirilmi\u015ftir.<\/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 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lan gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n kabul edilebilir oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
12. Anayasa Mahkemesi, \u00f6n\u00fcne gelen bir\u00e7ok ba\u015fvuruda gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n kapsam ve i\u00e7eri\u011fini belirlemi\u015ftir. Anayasa Mahkemesi \u00f6zellikle a\u00e7\u0131k ve somut bir bi\u00e7imde \u00f6ne s\u00fcr\u00fclen iddia ve savunmalar\u0131n davan\u0131n sonucuna etkili olmas\u0131, ba\u015fka bir deyi\u015fle davan\u0131n sonucunu de\u011fi\u015ftirebilecek nitelikte bulunmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde davayla do\u011frudan ilgili olan bu hususlara mahkemelerce makul bir gerek\u00e7e ile yan\u0131t verilmesi gerekti\u011fine dikkat \u00e7ekmi\u015ftir (Muhittin Kaya ve Muhittin Kaya \u0130n\u015faat Taahh\u00fct Madencilik G\u0131da Turizm Pazarlama Sanayi ve Ticaret Ltd. \u015eti., B. No: 2013\/1213, 4\/12\/2013, \u00a7\u00a7 25, 26; Vesim Parlak, B. No: 2012\/1034, 20\/3\/2014, \u00a7\u00a7 33, 34; Yasemin Ek\u015fi, B. No: 2013\/5486, 4\/12\/2013, \u00a7\u00a7 56, 57; Sencer Ba\u015fat ve di\u011ferleri [GK], B. No: 2013\/7800, 18\/6\/2014, \u00a7\u00a7 31-39; M\u00fcn\u00fcr Ata, B. No: 2014\/4958, 22\/1\/2015, \u00a7\u00a7 37-43; Hikmet \u00c7elik ve di\u011ferleri, B. No: 2013\/4894, 15\/12\/2015, \u00a7\u00a7 54-59; \u015eah Tar\u0131m \u0130n\u015f. Tur. Ltd. \u015eti., B. No: 2013\/7847, 9\/3\/2016, \u00a7\u00a7 36-48).<\/p>\n
13. Ku\u015fkusuz adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 su\u00e7 isnad\u0131yla ilgili yarg\u0131lamalarda bile mahkemelerin fiil\u00ee ve hukuki karinelere dayanmas\u0131n\u0131 b\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fcyle yasaklamamaktad\u0131r. Ancak su\u00e7 isnad\u0131na ili\u015fkin bir yarg\u0131lamada karinenin adil yarg\u0131lama hakk\u0131n\u0131 ihlal etmemesi i\u00e7in karineyle ki\u015finin otomatik olarak su\u00e7lu ilan edilmemesi, bu ba\u011flamda karinenin aksinin ispat edilebilir nitelikte olmas\u0131 ve ba\u015fvurucunun karinenin aksini ispatlama gayesiyle yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131klama ve sundu\u011fu delillerin mahkeme taraf\u0131ndan titizlikle ele al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n g\u00f6sterilmi\u015f olmas\u0131 gerekir (Gurbet \u00c7oban, B. No: 2019\/38857, 17\/11\/2021, \u00a7 47).<\/p>\n
14. Somut olayda Mahkemenin; ba\u015fvurucunun \u00f6rg\u00fctle iltisakl\u0131 kurumlarda \u00f6\u011fretmen olarak \u00e7al\u0131\u015fm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131na, e\u015fi hakk\u0131ndaki tan\u0131k Y.K.n\u0131n beyanlar\u0131na, 2010 y\u0131l\u0131nda yap\u0131lan KPSS’de y\u00fcksek ba\u015far\u0131 g\u00f6stermi\u015f olmas\u0131na ra\u011fmen tekrarlanan s\u0131nava girmemi\u015f olmas\u0131na ve son olarak an\u0131lan s\u0131navda e\u015fiyle ayn\u0131 soruya yanl\u0131\u015f cevap vermi\u015f olmas\u0131 hususlar\u0131na dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r (bkz. \u00a7 4).<\/p>\n
15. Karar\u0131n gerek\u00e7esinde h\u00fckme esas al\u0131nan delillerin a\u011f\u0131rl\u0131\u011f\u0131 hususunda Mahkemece herhangi bir de\u011ferlendirmede bulunulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Bununla birlikte Yarg\u0131tay uygulamas\u0131na g\u00f6re \u00f6rg\u00fctle iltisakl\u0131 e\u011fitim kurumlar\u0131nda \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan ki\u015filerin bu eylemlerinin sempati ve iltisak boyutunu a\u015fan, \u00f6rg\u00fcte yard\u0131m etme ya da \u00fcye olma kast\u0131yla hareket edildi\u011fini ispat eden faaliyetler kapsam\u0131nda de\u011ferlendirilmedi\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr (bir\u00e7ok karar aras\u0131ndan bkz. Yarg\u0131tay 16. Ceza Dairesinin 22\/12\/2020 tarihli ve E.2020\/4706, K.2020\/6676, 2\/3\/2021 tarihli ve E.2019\/5505, K.2021\/1793 say\u0131l\u0131 kararlar\u0131).<\/p>\n
16. Gerek\u00e7eli karar ve Yarg\u0131tay onama karar\u0131na g\u00f6re ba\u015fvurucunun FET\u00d6\/PDY lideri ve y\u00f6neticilerinin talimat\u0131 do\u011frultusunda hareket etti\u011fi yarg\u0131sal makamlarca kabul edilmi\u015ftir. Somut olayda ba\u015fvurucu, yarg\u0131laman\u0131n t\u00fcm a\u015famalar\u0131nda hakk\u0131ndaki isnatlar\u0131n su\u00e7 olu\u015fturmayan eylemler oldu\u011funu, hayat\u0131n\u0131 kazanmak i\u00e7in \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 kurum nedeniyle ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc \u00fcyesi kabul edildi\u011fini, 2005 ile 2010 y\u0131llar\u0131 aras\u0131nda bir defa KPSS’ye girdi\u011fini, s\u0131nav\u0131n iptal edilmesinin ard\u0131ndan yenilenen s\u0131nava sa\u011fl\u0131k sorunlar\u0131 nedeniyle giremedi\u011fini, di\u011fer iddialar\u0131n ise kendisi d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda e\u015fi ile ilgili oldu\u011funu savunmu\u015ftur. Bununla birlikte Mahkeme ba\u015fvurucunun, s\u00fcbuta, ceza hukukunun temel prensiplerine ve Yarg\u0131tay uygulamas\u0131na temas eden ve karar\u0131n sonucunu de\u011fi\u015ftirebilecek nitelikteki savunma ve itirazlar\u0131 hakk\u0131nda hi\u00e7bir somut de\u011ferlendirmede bulunmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
17. Somut olayda Mahkemenin ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7undan verdi\u011fi mahk\u00fbmiyet karar\u0131nda soyut ifadelere yer vererek ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131ndaki iddialar\u0131 ayr\u0131 ve a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a tart\u0131\u015fmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir. Bu kapsamda Mahkemenin ba\u015fvurucunun FET\u00d6\/PDY’nin hiyerar\u015fik yap\u0131lanmas\u0131na kendi iste\u011fiyle ve bilerek d\u00e2hil oldu\u011funu g\u00f6steren, s\u00fcreklilik, \u00e7e\u015fitlilik ve yo\u011funluk i\u00e7eren delil olarak kabul etti\u011fi unsurlar\u0131 yeterli bir \u015fekilde ortaya koymad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. Bu durum, yarg\u0131laman\u0131n bir b\u00fct\u00fcn h\u00e2linde adil olmaktan \u00e7\u0131kmas\u0131na neden olmu\u015ftur (ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc \u00fcyeli\u011fi su\u00e7una ili\u015fkin benzer bir karar i\u00e7in bkz. Veysi G\u00fcne\u015f, B. No: 2015\/4993, 13\/2\/2020, \u00a7\u00a7 32-35).<\/p>\n
18. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle ba\u015fvurucunun Anayasa’n\u0131n 36. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
\u00d6mer \u00c7INAR bu g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fe kat\u0131lmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
B. Di\u011fer \u0130hlal \u0130ddialar\u0131<\/p>\n
19. Ba\u015fvurucu, hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 olarak mahk\u00fbmiyetine karar verilmesi nedeniyle adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u00e7e\u015fitli g\u00fcvencelerinin ihlal edildi\u011fini de ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
20. Ba\u015fvuruda gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine karar verildi\u011finden ba\u015fvurucunun di\u011fer \u015fik\u00e2yetleri hakk\u0131nda kabul edilebilirlik ve esas y\u00f6n\u00fcnden ayr\u0131ca bir inceleme yap\u0131lmas\u0131na gerek olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
III. G\u0130DER\u0130M<\/p>\n
21. Ba\u015fvurucu; ihlalin tespiti ile yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131, maddi ve manevi tazminata h\u00fckmedilmesini talep etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
22. 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. Adli yard\u0131m talebinin KABUL\u00dcNE,<\/p>\n
B. Gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n KABUL ED\u0130LEB\u0130L\u0130R OLDU\u011eUNA OYB\u0130RL\u0130\u011e\u0130YLE,<\/p>\n
C. Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 36. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130HLAL ED\u0130LD\u0130\u011e\u0130NE \u00d6mer \u00c7INAR’\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131oyu ve OY\u00c7OKLU\u011eUYLA,<\/p>\n
D. Di\u011fer ihlal iddialar\u0131n\u0131n \u0130NCELENMES\u0130NE GEREK OLMADI\u011eINA OYB\u0130RL\u0130\u011e\u0130YLE,<\/p>\n
E. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlalinin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmak \u00fczere Ankara 2. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesine (E.2016\/181, K.2019\/464) G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
F. Ba\u015fvurucunun tazminat taleplerinin REDD\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
G. 30.000 TL vek\u00e2let \u00fccretinden olu\u015fan yarg\u0131lama giderinin ba\u015fvurucuya \u00d6DENMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
H. \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
\u0130. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE 27\/11\/2024 tarihinde karar verildi.<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
KAR\u015eIOY<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fvurucular ceza yarg\u0131lamas\u0131nda esasl\u0131 iddia ve savunmalar\u0131n\u0131n gerek\u00e7ede de\u011ferlendirilmedi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Say\u0131n Mahkemece yap\u0131lan de\u011ferlendirmede \u00e7o\u011funluk taraf\u0131ndan Ba\u015fvurucunun Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 36. maddesinde d\u00fczenlenen adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine karar verilmi\u015ftir. A\u015fa\u011f\u0131da belirtilen gerek\u00e7eler ile \u00e7o\u011funluk g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne kat\u0131lm\u0131yorum. \u015e\u00f6yle ki;<\/p>\n
2010 y\u0131l\u0131nda yap\u0131lan KPSS s\u0131nav\u0131nda 100 ve \u00fczeri do\u011fru yapan 3227 \u015f\u00fcpheli hakk\u0131nda ba\u015flat\u0131lan soru\u015fturma kapsam\u0131nda Y.K. isimli \u015f\u00fcpheli Ba\u015fvurucunun e\u015finin s\u0131nav sorular\u0131n\u0131 kendisine verdi\u011fini beyan etmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k taraf\u0131ndan, Ba\u015fvurucu ve e\u015finin s\u0131navda y\u00fcksek ba\u015far\u0131 g\u00f6sterdi\u011fi, Ba\u015fvurucunun 2004-2010 tarihleri aras\u0131nda \u00f6rg\u00fctle iltisakl\u0131 kurumlarda \u00f6\u011fretmenlik yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 nazara al\u0131narak Ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda soru\u015fturma ba\u015flat\u0131lm\u0131\u015f, sonras\u0131nda Ba\u015fvurucu ve baz\u0131 \u015f\u00fcpheliler aleyhine FET\u00d6\/PDY \u00fcyesi olma, resmi belgede sahtecilik, kamu kurum ve kurulu\u015flar\u0131 zarar\u0131na doland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k su\u00e7lar\u0131ndan kamu davas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Mahkeme Ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda FET\u00d6\/PDY \u00fcyesi olmaktan dolay\u0131 cezaya h\u00fckmetmi\u015f, resmi belgede sahtecilik, kamu kurum ve kurulu\u015flar\u0131 zarar\u0131na doland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k su\u00e7lar\u0131ndan ise beraat karar\u0131 vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Yerel Mahkeme gerek\u00e7esinde, Ba\u015fvurucunun s\u0131n\u0131f \u00f6\u011fretmenli\u011fi b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcnden mezun oldu\u011fu, 2005-2010 y\u0131llar\u0131 aras\u0131nda KPSS e\u011fitim bilimleri testine (2010 y\u0131l\u0131nda olmak \u00fczere) sadece bir kez girdi\u011fi ve 120 sorudan 110 soruyu do\u011fru cevaplad\u0131\u011f\u0131, genel yetenek testinden 60 sorudan 54 do\u011fru ve genel k\u00fclt\u00fcr testinden 60 soruda 45 do\u011fru cevap verdi\u011fi, Ba\u015fvurucunun e\u015finin de 120 sorudan 116\u2019s\u0131n\u0131 do\u011fru cevaplad\u0131\u011f\u0131, genel yetenek testinde 39. soruda ayn\u0131 yanl\u0131\u015f\u0131 yapt\u0131klar\u0131 ayr\u0131nt\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde belirtilmi\u015ftir. Yine mahkeme gerek\u00e7esinde \u015f\u00fcphelilerden Y.K\u2019n\u0131n, Ba\u015fvurucunun e\u015finin s\u0131navdan 2-3 g\u00fcn \u00f6nce kendisine geldi\u011fi, s\u0131navda \u00e7\u0131kma ihtimali olan sorular\u0131 kendisine verdi\u011fini ve kimse ile payla\u015fmamas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi hususunda uyar\u0131da bulundu\u011funu, verilen sorular\u0131n yakla\u015f\u0131k 7-8 sayfa oldu\u011funu, s\u0131navda sorulan sorular\u0131n b\u00fcy\u00fck \u00e7o\u011funlu\u011funun kendisine verilen belgede bulundu\u011fu ifadelerine yer verilmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda verilen h\u00fck\u00fcm, istinaf ve temyiz incelemesinden ge\u00e7erek kesinle\u015fmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
2010 tarihli KPSS s\u0131nav\u0131nda Ba\u015fvurucunun ve e\u015finin yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 do\u011fru say\u0131s\u0131, yine hakk\u0131nda soru\u015fturma y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclen \u015f\u00fcphelilerinden birinin ifadesi birlikte de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde Ba\u015fvurucunun ve e\u015finin KPSS s\u0131nav\u0131ndan \u00f6nce sorular\u0131 ve cevaplar\u0131n\u0131 elde etti\u011fi ve bunlar\u0131 baz\u0131 ki\u015filerle daha payla\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 bu nedenlerle de Ba\u015fvurucunun \u00f6rg\u00fct \u00fcyeli\u011finden cezaland\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 hususunda mahkemenin yeterli gerek\u00e7e ortaya koydu\u011fu g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir. Anayasa Mahkemesi Ayd\u0131n Yavuz ve Di\u011ferleri ba\u015fvurusunda (Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2016\/22169, Karar Tarihi: 20\/6\/2017, R.G. Tarih ve Say\u0131: 30\/6\/2017-30110) FET\u00d6\/PDY \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fcn \u00f6zelliklerine ili\u015fkin kapsaml\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131klamalara yer vermi\u015ftir. S\u00f6z konusu kararda yap\u0131lan tespitlerin baz\u0131lar\u0131 \u015f\u00f6yledir; \u201c\u2026i.FET\u00d6\/PDY\u2019nin ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7ta \u00f6zellikle din ve e\u011fitim alan\u0131nda faaliyet g\u00f6stererek toplumda me\u015fruiyet kazanmaya \u00e7al\u0131\u015fm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. ii. FET\u00d6\/PDY, b\u00fcnyesinde bulunan \u0131\u015f\u0131k (talebe) evleri, okullar, yurtlar ve dershaneler arac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131yla ula\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 gen\u00e7leri ama\u00e7lar\u0131 do\u011frultusunda yeti\u015ftirmi\u015f ve bu ki\u015filer yap\u0131lanman\u0131n insan kayna\u011f\u0131n\u0131 olu\u015fturmu\u015ftur\u2026iv. FET\u00d6\/PDY’nin sosyal, k\u00fclt\u00fcrel ve ekonomik alanda y\u00fcr\u00fctt\u00fc\u011f\u00fc yasal faaliyetleri; dershaneler, okullar, \u00fcniversiteler, dernekler, vak\u0131flar, sendikalar, meslek odalar\u0131, iktisadi kurulu\u015flar, finans kurulu\u015flar\u0131, gazeteler, dergiler, TV kanallar\u0131, radyolar, \u0130nternet siteleri, hastaneler gibi sivil alanlara ili\u015fkindir\u2026\u201d. Bu kararda belirtildi\u011fi \u00fczere, FET\u00d6\/PDY ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fcn ortaya \u00e7\u0131kmas\u0131 ve toplumda me\u015fruiyet kazanmas\u0131ndaki en \u00f6nemli unsur, e\u011fitim faaliyetleri olmu\u015ftur. KPSS s\u0131nav\u0131n\u0131n ve \u00f6zellikle e\u011fitim bilimleri testine ili\u015fkin sorular\u0131n \u00f6nceden elde edilmesi ve \u00f6rg\u00fctle irtibatl\u0131 ya da iltisakl\u0131 belirli ki\u015filerle payla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131, \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn resmi kurum ve okullara kendi b\u00fcnyesi i\u00e7erisinde yer alan ki\u015filerin \u00f6\u011fretmen olarak atanmas\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamas\u0131 ve bu \u015fekilde e\u011fitim sekt\u00f6r\u00fcndeki yap\u0131lanmas\u0131n\u0131n bir g\u00f6r\u00fcn\u00fcm\u00fcn\u00fc olu\u015fturmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
\u00c7o\u011funluk taraf\u0131ndan Ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131ndaki iddialar\u0131n soyut oldu\u011fu, mahkemece \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn hiyerar\u015fik yap\u0131s\u0131na bilerek kat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6steren s\u00fcreklilik, \u00e7e\u015fitlilik ve yo\u011funluk i\u00e7eren delillerin yeterli \u015fekilde ortaya konulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7e g\u00f6sterilmi\u015f ise de Ba\u015fvurucunun s\u0131n\u0131f \u00f6\u011fretmeni oldu\u011fu, FET\u00d6\/PDY \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc ile iltisakl\u0131 okullarda \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131, e\u015fi ile birlikte girdi\u011fi s\u0131navda \u00e7ok y\u00fcksek say\u0131da soruyu do\u011fru cevaplad\u0131\u011f\u0131, tekrarlanan s\u0131nava girmedi\u011fi ve sorular\u0131 Ba\u015fvurucunun e\u015finden ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 itiraf eden \u015f\u00fcpheli beyanlar\u0131 nazara al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda art\u0131k Ba\u015fvurucunun \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn hiyerar\u015fik yap\u0131s\u0131na bilerek dahil olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ya da eylemlerinin \u00e7e\u015fitlilik, yo\u011funluk ve s\u00fcreklilik i\u00e7ermedi\u011finin ortaya konulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 s\u00f6ylemek m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011fildir. Yarg\u0131lamay\u0131 yapan mahkeme ve bu karar\u0131 denetleyen istinaf ve temyiz mahkemeleri Ba\u015fvurucunun sadece \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 kurum nedeniyle \u00f6rg\u00fct \u00fcyeli\u011fini kabul etmemi\u015f, s\u0131nav sorular\u0131n\u0131n elde edilmesi, di\u011fer \u015f\u00fcpheli beyanlar\u0131 ve s\u0131navdaki ba\u015far\u0131 \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fctlerini de de\u011ferlendirmi\u015f ve bu hususlar\u0131 gerek\u00e7eli karara yans\u0131tm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Bu nedenlerle Ba\u015fvurucunun adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin \u00e7o\u011funluk g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne kat\u0131lm\u0131yorum.<\/p>\n
\u00dcye<\/p>\n
\u00d6mer \u00c7INAR<\/p>\n
\u200bAnayasa Mahkemesi’nin 27\/11\/2024 tarihli ve 2022\/87258 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 K. O. BA\u015eVURUSU (Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2021\/59876) \u00a0 Karar Tarihi: 27\/11\/2024 \u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM \u00a0 KARAR \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 : Burak G\u00dcNG\u00d6R Ba\u015fvurucu : Vekili : Av. Murat YILMAZ \u00a0 I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130 1. Ba\u015fvuru, ceza davas\u0131nda esasl\u0131 iddia ve savunmalar\u0131n gerek\u00e7ede de\u011ferlendirilmemesi nedeniyle adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir. 2. 2010 y\u0131l\u0131nda yap\u0131lan Kamu Personeli Se\u00e7me S\u0131nav\u0131na (KPSS) ili\u015fkin ba\u015flat\u0131lan bir soru\u015fturmada beyan\u0131na ba\u015fvurulan, 100 ve \u00fczeri do\u011fru yap\u0131p 3227 \u015f\u00fcpheli aras\u0131nda bulunan \u015f\u00fcpheli Y.K. m\u00fcdafii huzurundaki soru\u015fturma evresinde verdi\u011fi ifadesinde ba\u015fvurucunun e\u015finin KPSS sorular\u0131n\u0131 kendine verdi\u011fi y\u00f6n\u00fcnde beyanda bulunmas\u0131; ba\u015fvurucunun an\u0131lan s\u0131navda y\u00fcksek ba\u015far\u0131 g\u00f6stermi\u015f olmas\u0131 ve 2004 ile 2010 y\u0131llar\u0131 aras\u0131nda \u00f6rg\u00fctle iltisakl\u0131 kurumlarda \u00f6\u011fretmenlik yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 tespitleri \u00fczerine ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda Ankara Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 (Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k) taraf\u0131ndan Fetullah\u00e7\u0131 Ter\u00f6r \u00d6rg\u00fct\u00fc\/Paralel Devlet Yap\u0131lanmas\u0131na (FET\u00d6\/PDY) \u00fcye olma ve di\u011fer su\u00e7lardan soru\u015fturma ba\u015flat\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. 3. Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n 11\/11\/2016 tarihli iddianamesi ile aralar\u0131nda ba\u015fvurucunun da oldu\u011fu baz\u0131 \u015f\u00fcpheliler hakk\u0131nda FET\u00d6\/PDY \u00fcyesi olma, resm\u00ee belgede sahtecilik ve kamu kurum ve kurulu\u015flar\u0131 zarar\u0131na doland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k su\u00e7lar\u0131ndan kamu davas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. 4. Ankara 2. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesinde (Mahkeme) g\u00f6r\u00fclen yarg\u0131lama sonucunda …<\/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-30464","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n