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
FATMA FIRAT VE D\u0130\u011eERLER\u0130 BA\u015eVURUSU<\/p>\n
(Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2022\/74726)<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Karar Tarihi: 11\/12\/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
Kenan YA\u015eAR<\/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
Furkan Samet ESER<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fvurucular<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Fatma FIRAT ve di\u011ferleri [bkz. ekli listenin (C) s\u00fctunu]<\/p>\n
Vekilleri<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
bkz. ekli listenin (F) s\u00fctunu<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130<\/p>\n
1. Ba\u015fvuru, beraat veya kovu\u015fturmaya yer olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair karar ile sonu\u00e7lanan ceza yarg\u0131lamas\u0131 s\u00fcre\u00e7lerinde haklar\u0131nda uygulanan g\u00f6zalt\u0131 ve\/veya tutuklama gibi koruma tedbirleri nedeniyle 4\/12\/2004 tarihli ve 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 Ceza Muhakemesi Kanunu’nun 141. maddesi kapsam\u0131nda tazminat davas\u0131 a\u00e7an ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n s\u00f6z konusu davalarda yetersiz tazminata h\u00fckmedilmesi nedeniyle ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi haklar\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddialar\u0131na ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
2. Ba\u015fvurucular, nihai kararlar\u0131 \u00f6\u011frendikten sonra s\u00fcresi i\u00e7inde muhtelif tarihlerde bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
3. Komisyon, ba\u015fvurunun kabul edilebilirlik ve esas incelemesinin B\u00f6l\u00fcm taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
II. DE\u011eERLEND\u0130RME<\/p>\n
4. Ekli listenin (B) s\u00fctununda g\u00f6sterilen dosyalar\u0131n konu y\u00f6n\u00fcnden hukuki irtibat\u0131 bulunmas\u0131 nedeniyle ba\u015fvurular\u0131n 2022\/74726 numaral\u0131 bireysel ba\u015fvuru dosyas\u0131yla birle\u015ftirilmesine ve incelemenin bu ba\u015fvuru \u00fczerinden y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclmesine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
5. Ekli listenin (E) s\u00fctununda adli yard\u0131m talebinde bulundu\u011fu belirtilen ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n ba\u015fvuru giderlerini kar\u015f\u0131layabilecek \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde mal varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve taleplerinin dayanaktan yoksun olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olup adli yard\u0131m taleplerinin kabul\u00fcne ve yarg\u0131lama giderini \u00f6demekten muaf tutulmalar\u0131na karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
A. Ki\u015fi H\u00fcrriyeti ve G\u00fcvenli\u011fi Hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130hlal Edildi\u011fine \u0130li\u015fkin \u0130ddia<\/p>\n
6. Ba\u015fvurucular \u00f6zetle haklar\u0131ndaki ceza muhakemesi s\u00fcrecinde uygulanan g\u00f6zalt\u0131 ve\/veya tutuklama \u015feklindeki haks\u0131z koruma tedbirleri nedeniyle a\u00e7t\u0131klar\u0131 tazminat davalar\u0131nda mahkemelerce h\u00fckmedilen tazminat miktarlar\u0131n\u0131n yetersiz oldu\u011funu belirterek ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Ba\u015fvuru belgelerinin birer \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\u015fvurucular\u0131n bir k\u0131sm\u0131, Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131n g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne kar\u015f\u0131 beyanda bulunmu\u015f; ba\u015fvuru formundaki iddialar\u0131n\u0131 tekrarlam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
7. Anayasa Mahkemesi G\u00fclseren \u00c7\u0131tak ([GK], B. No: 2020\/1554, 27\/4\/2023) karar\u0131yla haklar\u0131nda kovu\u015fturmaya yer olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 veya beraat karar\u0131 verilenlerin 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 141. maddesinde \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen tazminat yolunu t\u00fckettikten sonra yakalama, g\u00f6zalt\u0131 veya tutuklaman\u0131n hukuki olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve \u00f6denen tazminat\u0131n yetersiz oldu\u011fu iddias\u0131yla yapt\u0131klar\u0131 bireysel ba\u015fvurularda ba\u015fvuru yollar\u0131n\u0131n t\u00fcketilmi\u015f kabul edilebilmesi i\u00e7in yaln\u0131zca 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 141. maddesinin (1) numaral\u0131 f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n (e) bendi kapsam\u0131nda bir tazminat davas\u0131n\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n yeterli olaca\u011f\u0131 sonucuna varm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Zira bu h\u00fck\u00fcmle yakalama, g\u00f6zalt\u0131 ve tutuklaman\u0131n daha sonra verilen kovu\u015fturmaya yer olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 veya beraat karar\u0131yla hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 h\u00e2le geldi\u011finin kabul edildi\u011fini, dolay\u0131s\u0131yla 141. maddesinin (1) numaral\u0131 f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n (e) bendi uyar\u0131nca a\u00e7\u0131lan tazminat davalar\u0131n\u0131n Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 19. maddesinin dokuzuncu f\u0131kras\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda oldu\u011funu de\u011ferlendirmi\u015ftir. Bu \u00e7er\u00e7evede bu bent kapsam\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131lan davalarda hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k kanun gere\u011fince kabul edildi\u011finden a\u011f\u0131r ceza mahkemesince bu bende dayan\u0131larak tazminat \u00f6denmesi durumunda Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 19. maddesinin dokuzuncu f\u0131kras\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda yap\u0131lacak inceleme tazminat miktar\u0131n\u0131n yeterli olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirlemekle s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 olacakt\u0131r (G\u00fclseren \u00c7\u0131tak, \u00a7\u00a7 36-38).<\/p>\n
8. Somut ba\u015fvurularda da A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemeleri taraf\u0131ndan ihlal tespiti yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ve bir miktar tazminata h\u00fckmedilmi\u015f oldu\u011fundan ba\u015fvurularda yap\u0131lacak inceleme, h\u00fckmedilen tazminat miktarlar\u0131n\u0131n yeterli olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirlemekle s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 olacakt\u0131r (M.E., B. No: 2018\/696, 9\/5\/2019, \u00a7 47).<\/p>\n
9. A\u011f\u0131r ceza mahkemelerinin tazminat i\u00e7in somut olay\u0131n \u015fartlar\u0131na g\u00f6re takdir yetkisi bulunmakla birlikte meydana gelen ihlalle orant\u0131l\u0131 olmayan \u00f6nemsiz miktarda bir tazminat Anayasa’n\u0131n 19. maddesinin dokuzuncu f\u0131kras\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131 olacakt\u0131r. \u00d6te yandan tazminat miktar\u0131 Anayasa Mahkemesinin benzer davalarda verdi\u011fi tazminat miktar\u0131na g\u00f6re kayda de\u011fer \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde d\u00fc\u015f\u00fck olmamal\u0131d\u0131r. Bununla birlikte h\u00fckmedilen miktar\u0131n Anayasa Mahkemesinin benzer durumlarda verilmesine h\u00fckmetti\u011fi tazminat miktar\u0131ndan d\u00fc\u015f\u00fck olmas\u0131 tek ba\u015f\u0131na Anayasa’n\u0131n 19. maddesinin dokuzuncu f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi anlam\u0131na gelmez. Tazminat\u0131n Anayasa’n\u0131n 19. maddesinin dokuzuncu f\u0131kras\u0131yla uyumlu olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 de\u011ferlendirirken somut olay\u0131n kendine \u00f6zg\u00fc \u015fartlar\u0131n\u0131n dikkate al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekir (M.E., \u00a7 48).<\/p>\n
10. Bunun yan\u0131nda Anayasa Mahkemesince manevi tazminat miktar\u0131n\u0131n yeterli olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 belirlenirken tazminata karar veren a\u011f\u0131r ceza mahkemesinin karar tarihinde Anayasa Mahkemesinin benzer ba\u015fvurular \u00fczerine verdi\u011fi veya verebilece\u011fi tazminat miktar\u0131na g\u00f6re bir kar\u015f\u0131la\u015ft\u0131rma yap\u0131lacakt\u0131r. Anayasa Mahkemesince yakalama, g\u00f6zalt\u0131 veya tutuklaman\u0131n hukuki olmamas\u0131 nedeniyle manevi tazminata h\u00fckmedilirken ki\u015finin sosyal ve ekonomik durumu, mesleki ve toplumsal konumu, \u00fczerine at\u0131l\u0131 su\u00e7un niteli\u011fi, koruma tedbirine neden olan olay\u0131n olu\u015f \u015fekli, tedbirin ki\u015finin \u00fczerinde b\u0131rakt\u0131\u011f\u0131 olumsuz etkiler ve tedbirin s\u00fcresi, tedbir nedeniyle meydana gelen ihlalin a\u011f\u0131rl\u0131\u011f\u0131 dikkate al\u0131nmaktad\u0131r (Siyami H\u0131d\u0131ro\u011flu [GK], B. No: 2018\/11489, 11\/1\/2024, \u00a7 35).<\/p>\n
11. Maddi zarar, zarara u\u011frayan\u0131n mevcut mal varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 ile uygulanan koruma tedbiri olmasayd\u0131 bumal varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n olaca\u011f\u0131 durum aras\u0131ndaki farktan ibarettir. Maddi zarar, mal varl\u0131\u011f\u0131nda meydana gelen fiil\u00ee azalma \u015feklinde ortaya \u00e7\u0131kabilece\u011fi gibi yoksun kal\u0131nan k\u00e2r \u015feklinde de olu\u015fabilir. \u00d6te yandan ihlal ile zarar aras\u0131nda nedensellik ba\u011f\u0131 bulunmas\u0131 gerekir. \u0130hlal ile zarar aras\u0131ndaki illiyet ba\u011f\u0131n\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131k olmamas\u0131, illiyet ba\u011f\u0131n\u0131n belirsiz veya spek\u00fclatif oldu\u011fu h\u00e2llerde maddi tazminata h\u00fckmedilmeyecektir. H\u00fckmedilecek tazminat miktar\u0131n\u0131n her zaman maddi zarara e\u015fit olmas\u0131 gerekmez. Ba\u015fvurucu lehine uygun bir tazminata h\u00fckmedilebilmesi de yeterli olabilir. Maddi tazminat\u0131n belirlenmesinde a\u011f\u0131r ceza mahkemelerinin daha iyi konumda olduklar\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r. Anayasa Mahkemesinin bireysel ba\u015fvuru incelemesinde a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a dayanaktan yoksun veya keyf\u00ee oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lmad\u0131k\u00e7a yetkili mahkemelerin maddi tazminat konusundaki takdirine m\u00fcdahalesi s\u00f6z konusu olamaz.<\/p>\n
12. Somut olayda a\u011f\u0131r ceza mahkemelerinin yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 de\u011ferlendirmeler sonucunda baz\u0131 ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n maddi tazminat taleplerini reddetmesinin keyf\u00ee oldu\u011fu, a\u00e7\u0131k ve bariz takdir hatas\u0131 i\u00e7erdi\u011fi s\u00f6ylenemeyecektir. Baz\u0131 ba\u015fvuruculara \u00f6denen maddi tazminat miktar\u0131n\u0131n ise somut olay\u0131n ko\u015fullar\u0131nda orant\u0131s\u0131z olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir.<\/p>\n
13. Mahkemelerce h\u00fckmedilen manevi tazminat miktar\u0131n\u0131n ise Anayasa Mahkemesinin benzer durumlarda \u00f6denmesine h\u00fckmetti\u011fi ya da h\u00fckmedebilece\u011fi tazminat miktar\u0131na g\u00f6re d\u00fc\u015f\u00fck oldu\u011fu sonucuna var\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r (Anayasa Mahkemesinin benzer olaylarda h\u00fckmedece\u011fi tazminat miktarlar\u0131 i\u00e7in bkz. a\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki tablo).<\/p>\n
14. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle Anayasa’n\u0131n 19. maddesinin -\u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc f\u0131kras\u0131yla ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 olarak- dokuzuncu f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
B. Makul S\u00fcrede Yarg\u0131lanma Hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130hlal Edildi\u011fine \u0130li\u015fkin \u0130ddia<\/p>\n
15. Baz\u0131 ba\u015fvurucular ayr\u0131ca tazminat davalar\u0131n\u0131n uzun s\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc belirterek makul s\u00fcrede yarg\u0131lanma haklar\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015flerdir.<\/p>\n
16. 12\/3\/2024 tarihinde y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe giren 2\/3\/2024 tarihli ve 7499 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’la 9\/1\/2013 tarihli ve 6384 say\u0131l\u0131 Tazminat Komisyonunun G\u00f6revleri ile \u00c7al\u0131\u015fma Usul ve Esaslar\u0131 Hakk\u0131nda Kanun’a eklenen 5\/A maddesi ve ayr\u0131ca an\u0131lan Kanun’un ge\u00e7ici 3. maddesinde yap\u0131lan de\u011fi\u015fiklik gere\u011fi, 12\/3\/2024 tarihi itibar\u0131yla Anayasa Mahkemesinde derdest olan, yarg\u0131lamalar\u0131n makul s\u00fcrede sonu\u00e7land\u0131r\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddias\u0131yla yap\u0131lan ba\u015fvurulara ili\u015fkin olarak ilk bak\u0131\u015fta ula\u015f\u0131labilir ve ihlal iddialar\u0131yla ilgili ba\u015far\u0131 \u015fans\u0131 sunma ve yeterli giderim sa\u011flama kapasitesi oldu\u011fu g\u00f6r\u00fclen Tazminat Komisyonuna ba\u015fvuru yolu t\u00fcketilmeden yap\u0131lan ba\u015fvurunun incelenmesinin bireysel ba\u015fvurunun ikincil niteli\u011fi ile ba\u011fda\u015fmayaca\u011f\u0131 de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finden ba\u015fvuru yollar\u0131n\u0131n t\u00fcketilmedi\u011fi kanaatine var\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r (Ahmet Kartalku\u015f, B. No: 2019\/39635, 19\/3\/2024, \u00a7 41).<\/p>\n
17. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle ba\u015fvurunun bu k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015fvuru yollar\u0131n\u0131n t\u00fcketilmemesi nedeniyle kabul edilemez oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
C. Di\u011fer \u0130hlal \u0130ddialar\u0131 Y\u00f6n\u00fcnden<\/p>\n
18. Ba\u015fvuruculardan bir k\u0131sm\u0131, yukar\u0131da belirtilen haklar\u0131n yan\u0131 s\u0131ra Anayasa’da g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan di\u011fer temel hak ve \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fcklerinin ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n iddialar\u0131 Anayasa Mahkemesinin bireysel ba\u015fvuru inceleme yetkisine girdi\u011fi \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde ve sunulan belgeler \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde temel hak ve \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fcklerin ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddialar\u0131n 30\/3\/2011 tarihli ve 6216 say\u0131l\u0131 Anayasa Mahkemesinin Kurulu\u015fu ve Yarg\u0131lama Usulleri Hakk\u0131nda Kanun’da d\u00fczenlenen di\u011fer kabul edilebilirlik kriterlerini kar\u015f\u0131lamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle ba\u015fvurunun bu k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131n kabul edilebilirlik kriterlerini kar\u015f\u0131lamamas\u0131 nedeniyle kabul edilemez oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
III. G\u0130DER\u0130M<\/p>\n
19. Ba\u015fvurucular; ihlalin tespiti, yarg\u0131laman\u0131n yenilenmesi, maddi ve manevi tazminat taleplerinde bulunmu\u015flard\u0131r.<\/p>\n
20. Anayasa Mahkemesince yap\u0131lan inceleme sonucunda Anayasa’n\u0131n 19. maddesinin -\u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc f\u0131kras\u0131yla ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 olarak- dokuzuncu f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine karar karar verilmi\u015ftir. Bu itibarla ihlalin mahkeme kararlar\u0131ndan kaynakland\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvuru konusu olayda ihlalin ve 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 (6216 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 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), 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). Manevi tazminat miktar\u0131n\u0131n yeterli olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 belirlenirken tazminata karar veren a\u011f\u0131r ceza mahkemesinin karar tarihi, \u015fayet manevi tazminat miktar\u0131 b\u00f6lge adliye mahkemesi karar\u0131yla de\u011fi\u015ftirilmi\u015fse istinaf mahkemesinin karar tarihi itibar\u0131yla Anayasa Mahkemesinin benzer ba\u015fvurular \u00fczerine verece\u011fi tazminat miktar\u0131na g\u00f6re bir kar\u015f\u0131la\u015ft\u0131rma yap\u0131larak uygun tazminat\u0131n belirlenmesi gerekir (bkz. a\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki tablo).<\/p>\n
21. Karar\u0131n, ihlalin ve sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131laman\u0131n yeterli bir giderim sa\u011flayaca\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan tazminat taleplerinin reddi ile yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmak \u00fczere ekli listenin (D) s\u00fctununda belirtilen Mahkemelere g\u00f6nderilmesi gerekmektedir. (Yeniden yarg\u0131laman\u0131n B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemeleri taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gereken ba\u015fvurularda dava dosyalar\u0131n\u0131n ilk derece mahkemelerinden temin edilmesi gerekmektedir. )<\/p>\n
IV. H\u00dcK\u00dcM<\/p>\n
A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle;<\/p>\n
A. Ba\u015fvurular\u0131n B\u0130RLE\u015eT\u0130R\u0130LMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
B. Adli yard\u0131m talebinde bulunan ekli listenin (E) s\u00fctununda belirtilen ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n adli yard\u0131m taleplerinin KABUL\u00dcNE,<\/p>\n
C. 1. Ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi 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 iddialar\u0131n ba\u015fvuru yollar\u0131n\u0131n t\u00fcketilmemesi nedeniyle KABUL ED\u0130LEMEZ OLDU\u011eUNA,<\/p>\n
3. Di\u011fer ihlal iddialar\u0131n\u0131n kabul edilebilirlik kriterlerini kar\u015f\u0131lamamas\u0131 nedeniyle KABUL ED\u0130LEMEZ OLDU\u011eUNA,<\/p>\n
D. Anayasa’n\u0131n 19. maddesinin -\u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc f\u0131kras\u0131yla ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 olarak- dokuzuncu f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n \u0130HLAL ED\u0130LD\u0130\u011e\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
E. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin ihlalin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmak \u00fczere ekli listenin (D) s\u00fctununda belirtilen mahkemelere G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
F. Ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n tazminat taleplerinin REDD\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
G. Vekille temsil edilen ba\u015fvuruculara ekli listenin (G) s\u00fctununda belirtilen vek\u00e2let \u00fccretleri ile ekli listenin (E) s\u00fctununda belirtilen har\u00e7lar\u0131n bu tabloda g\u00f6sterildi\u011fi \u015fekilde \u00d6DENMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
H. \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
\u0130. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE 11\/12\/2024 tarihinde OYB\u0130RL\u0130\u011e\u0130YLE karar verildi.<\/p>\n
2016 y\u0131l\u0131 i\u00e7in<\/p>\n
-Bir g\u00fcn g\u00f6zalt\u0131 i\u00e7in asgari 300 TL<\/p>\n
-Tutuklama tedbiri i\u00e7in tutukluluk s\u00fcresine g\u00f6re Asgari: 15.000TL, Ortalama: 40.000, Azami: 100.000 TL<\/p>\n
2017 y\u0131l\u0131 i\u00e7in<\/p>\n
– Bir g\u00fcn g\u00f6zalt\u0131 i\u00e7in asgari 360 TL<\/p>\n
– Tutuklama tedbiri i\u00e7in tutukluluk s\u00fcresine g\u00f6re Asgari: 18.000TL, Ortalama: 48.000 TL, Azami: 120.000 TL<\/p>\n
2018 y\u0131l\u0131 i\u00e7in<\/p>\n
– Bir g\u00fcn g\u00f6zalt\u0131 i\u00e7in asgari 400 TL<\/p>\n
– Tutuklama tedbiri i\u00e7in tutukluluk s\u00fcresine g\u00f6re Asgari: 20.000TL, Ortalama: 54.000 TL, Azami: 135.000 TL<\/p>\n
2019 y\u0131l\u0131 i\u00e7in<\/p>\n
– Bir g\u00fcn g\u00f6zalt\u0131 i\u00e7in asgari 600 TL – -Tutuklama tedbiri i\u00e7in tutukluluk s\u00fcresine g\u00f6re Asgari: 29.700TL, Ortalama: 79.200 TL, Azami: 198.000 TL<\/p>\n
2020 -2021 y\u0131llar\u0131 i\u00e7in<\/p>\n
– Bir g\u00fcn g\u00f6zalt\u0131 i\u00e7in asgari 600 TL – -Tutuklama tedbiri i\u00e7in tutukluluk s\u00fcresine g\u00f6re Asgari: 30.000TL, Ortalama: 80.000 TL, Azami: 200.000 TL<\/p>\n
2022 y\u0131l\u0131 i\u00e7in<\/p>\n
– Bir g\u00fcn g\u00f6zalt\u0131 i\u00e7in asgari 1.350 TL – -Tutuklama tedbiri i\u00e7in tutukluluk s\u00fcresine g\u00f6re Asgari: 67.500TL, Ortalama: 180.000 TL, Azami: 450.000 TL<\/p>\n
2023 y\u0131l\u0131 i\u00e7in<\/p>\n
– Bir g\u00fcn g\u00f6zalt\u0131 i\u00e7in asgari 1.800 TL – -Tutuklama tedbiri i\u00e7in tutukluluk s\u00fcresine g\u00f6re Asgari: 90.000TL, Ortalama: 240.000 TL, Azami: 600.000 TL<\/p>\n
2024 y\u0131l\u0131 i\u00e7in<\/p>\n
– Bir g\u00fcn g\u00f6zalt\u0131 i\u00e7in asgari 2.970 TL –<\/p>\n
-Tutuklama tedbiri i\u00e7in tutukluluk s\u00fcresine g\u00f6re Asgari: 148.500TL, Ortalama: 396.000 TL, Azami: 990.000 TL<\/p>\n
\u200bAnayasa Mahkemesi’nin 11\/12\/2024 tarihli ve 2022\/74726 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 FATMA FIRAT VE D\u0130\u011eERLER\u0130 BA\u015eVURUSU (Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2022\/74726) \u00a0 Karar Tarihi: 11\/12\/2024 \u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM \u00a0 KARAR \u00a0 Ba\u015fkan : Basri BA\u011eCI \u00dcyeler : Engin YILDIRIM \u00a0 \u00a0 Kenan YA\u015eAR \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00d6mer \u00c7INAR \u00a0 \u00a0 Metin KIRATLI Raport\u00f6r : Furkan Samet ESER Ba\u015fvurucular : Fatma FIRAT ve di\u011ferleri [bkz. ekli listenin (C) s\u00fctunu] Vekilleri : bkz. ekli listenin (F) s\u00fctunu \u00a0 I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130 1. Ba\u015fvuru, beraat veya kovu\u015fturmaya yer olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair karar ile sonu\u00e7lanan ceza yarg\u0131lamas\u0131 s\u00fcre\u00e7lerinde haklar\u0131nda uygulanan g\u00f6zalt\u0131 ve\/veya tutuklama gibi koruma tedbirleri nedeniyle 4\/12\/2004 tarihli ve 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 Ceza Muhakemesi Kanunu’nun 141. maddesi kapsam\u0131nda tazminat davas\u0131 a\u00e7an ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n s\u00f6z konusu davalarda yetersiz tazminata h\u00fckmedilmesi nedeniyle ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi haklar\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddialar\u0131na ili\u015fkindir. 2. Ba\u015fvurucular, nihai kararlar\u0131 \u00f6\u011frendikten sonra s\u00fcresi i\u00e7inde muhtelif tarihlerde bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunmu\u015ftur. 3. Komisyon, ba\u015fvurunun kabul edilebilirlik ve esas incelemesinin B\u00f6l\u00fcm taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir. II. DE\u011eERLEND\u0130RME 4. Ekli listenin (B) s\u00fctununda g\u00f6sterilen dosyalar\u0131n konu y\u00f6n\u00fcnden hukuki irtibat\u0131 bulunmas\u0131 nedeniyle ba\u015fvurular\u0131n 2022\/74726 numaral\u0131 bireysel ba\u015fvuru dosyas\u0131yla birle\u015ftirilmesine ve incelemenin bu ba\u015fvuru \u00fczerinden y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclmesine karar verilmesi gerekir. 5. Ekli listenin (E) s\u00fctununda adli yard\u0131m talebinde bulundu\u011fu belirtilen ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n ba\u015fvuru giderlerini kar\u015f\u0131layabilecek …<\/p>\n","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-33215","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n