T.C.<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay<\/p>\n
3. Ceza Dairesi<\/p>\n
2021\/2002 E., 2021\/8559 K.<\/p>\n
“\u0130\u00e7tihat Metni”<\/p>\n
Mahkemesi :Ceza Dairesi
\n\u0130lk Derece Mahkemesi : … 2. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesinin 20.05.2019 tarih ve 2017\/304 – 2019\/253 say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131
\nSu\u00e7 : Silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma
\nH\u00fck\u00fcm : TCK\u2019n\u0131n 314\/2, 3713 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanunun 3, 5\/1,TCK\u2019n\u0131n 62\/1, 58\/9, 53\/1, 63. maddeleri gere\u011fince mahkumiyete dair istinaf ba\u015fvurusunun esastan reddi
\nTemyiz edenlen : San\u0131k ve m\u00fcdafii<\/p>\n
B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesince verilen h\u00fck\u00fcm temyiz edilmekle;<\/p>\n
Temyiz edenin s\u0131fat\u0131, ba\u015fvurunun s\u00fcresi, karar\u0131n niteli\u011fi ve temyiz sebebine g\u00f6re dosya incelendi, gere\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcld\u00fc;<\/p>\n
Ceza s\u00fcresi y\u00f6n\u00fcnden yasal \u015fartlar\u0131 olu\u015fmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan; san\u0131\u011f\u0131n duru\u015fmal\u0131 inceleme isteminin CMK’n\u0131n 299. maddesi uyar\u0131nca REDD\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
Temyiz talebinin reddi nedenleri bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan i\u015fin esas\u0131na ge\u00e7ildi;<\/p>\n
Vicdani kan\u0131n\u0131n olu\u015ftu\u011fu duru\u015fma s\u00fcrecini yans\u0131tan tutanaklar, belgeler ve gerek\u00e7e i\u00e7eri\u011fine g\u00f6re yap\u0131lan incelemede;<\/p>\n
\u00d6rg\u00fct yap\u0131lanmas\u0131 i\u00e7erisinde, … il imaml\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6revi \u00fcstlenen san\u0131\u011f\u0131n eyleminin, \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn hiyerar\u015fik yap\u0131s\u0131 i\u00e7erisindeki konum ve g\u00f6revi, sorumluluk sahas\u0131nda sevk ve idare etti\u011fi \u00f6rg\u00fctsel faaliyetlerin \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn ama\u00e7 ve etkinli\u011fi bak\u0131m\u0131ndan \u00f6nem ve yo\u011funlu\u011fu g\u00f6zetildi\u011finde TCK’n\u0131n 314\/1 maddesinde yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u201cSilahl\u0131 Ter\u00f6r \u00d6rg\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fc Y\u00f6netme\u201d su\u00e7unu olu\u015fturdu\u011fu g\u00f6zetilmeden su\u00e7 vasf\u0131nda d\u00fc\u015f\u00fclen yan\u0131lg\u0131 sonucu yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131,<\/p>\n
Bozmay\u0131 gerektirmi\u015f, san\u0131k ve m\u00fcdafiinin temyiz itirazlar\u0131 bu itibarla yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015f oldu\u011fundan h\u00fckm\u00fcn bu sebeplerden dolay\u0131 CMK’n\u0131n 302\/2. maddesi uyar\u0131nca BOZULMASINA, CMK’n\u0131n 307\/4 maddesi gere\u011fince sonu\u00e7 ceza y\u00f6n\u00fcnden san\u0131\u011f\u0131n kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f haklar\u0131n\u0131n sakl\u0131 tutulmas\u0131na, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n tutuklulukta ge\u00e7irdi\u011fi s\u00fcre, bozma nedeni, at\u0131l\u0131 su\u00e7 i\u00e7in kanun maddelerinde \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen ceza miktar\u0131 ve mevcut delil durumu g\u00f6zetilerek tahliye talebinin reddi ile tutukluluk halinin devam\u0131na, 28.02.2019 tarihinde y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe giren 20.02.2019 tarih ve 7165 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanunun 8. maddesiyle de\u011fi\u015fik 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanunun 304. maddesi uyar\u0131nca dosyan\u0131n … 2. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesine, karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin bilgi i\u00e7in…B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 3. Ceza Dairesine g\u00f6nderilmek \u00fczere Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131na TEVD\u0130\u0130NE, 15.09.2021 tarihinde, \u00dcye …’\u0131n ayr\u0131nt\u0131lar\u0131 muhalefet \u015ferhinde belirtilen kar\u015f\u0131 oyu ve oy\u00e7oklu\u011fuyla karar verildi.<\/p>\n
KAR\u015eI OY:<\/p>\n
… 2. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesinde san\u0131k … hakk\u0131nda silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc y\u00f6neticili\u011fi (TCK 314\/1) su\u00e7undan kamu davas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lama sonucunda san\u0131k hakk\u0131nda ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7undan (TCK 314\/2) ve 3713 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanunun 5\/1 maddesi gere\u011fince cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verildi\u011fi, karar istinaf edilmesi \u00fczerine…B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 3. Ceza Dairesinin 01.10.2019 tarih, 2019\/1458 Esas, 2019\/892 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131yla istinaf ba\u015fvurusunun esastan reddine karar verilmesi \u00fczerine temyizen dosya Dairemize geldi\u011fi,<\/p>\n
Dairemizce dosya \u00fczerinde yap\u0131lan inceleme sonucunda; “\u00d6rg\u00fct yap\u0131lanmas\u0131 i\u00e7erisinde, … il imaml\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6revi \u00fcstlenen san\u0131\u011f\u0131n eyleminin, \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn hiyerar\u015fik yap\u0131s\u0131 i\u00e7erisindeki konum ve g\u00f6revi, sorumluluk sahas\u0131nda sevk ve idare etti\u011fi \u00f6rg\u00fctsel faaliyetlerin \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn ama\u00e7 ve etkinli\u011fi bak\u0131m\u0131ndan \u00f6nem ve yo\u011funlu\u011fu g\u00f6zetildi\u011finde TCK 314\/1 maddesinde yaz\u0131l\u0131 “Silahl\u0131 Ter\u00f6r \u00d6rg\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fc Y\u00f6netme” su\u00e7unu olu\u015fturdu\u011fu g\u00f6zetilmeden su\u00e7 vasf\u0131nda d\u00fc\u015f\u00fclen yan\u0131lg\u0131 sonucu yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131,” gerek\u00e7esiyle h\u00fckm\u00fcn oy\u00e7oklu\u011fuyla bozulmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir.
\nDairemizin \u00e7o\u011funlu\u011fuyla farkl\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fte olmam\u0131z\u0131n sebebi, aleyhe bozma yasa\u011f\u0131n\u0131n kapsam\u0131n\u0131n ne oldu\u011fu, aleyhe bozma yasa\u011f\u0131 sadece kapsad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ceza miktar\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnde de\u011fil, ilk h\u00fck\u00fcmdeki uygulamalar y\u00f6n\u00fcnde uygulanmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi, ilk h\u00fck\u00fcm san\u0131k taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmeyerek kesinle\u015fmi\u015f olsayd\u0131 durum ne olacak idiyse lehe temyizin bu durumu de\u011fi\u015ftirmemesi gerekti\u011fini, temyiz incelemesinde \u00f6ncelikle temyizin lehe mi aleyhe mi oldu\u011fu tespit edilerek incelemenin buna g\u00f6re yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi, san\u0131k lehine tecelli edecek bir hatan\u0131n hukuki neticelerinin aleyhte olacak \u015fekilde de\u011fi\u015ftirilip de\u011fi\u015ftirilemeyece\u011fi y\u00f6n\u00fcndedir.<\/p>\n
Daha a\u00e7\u0131k bir ifadeyle Yarg\u0131tay’\u0131n san\u0131k hakk\u0131nda verilen ilk kararla ilgili olarak hukuk \u00f6\u011fretisinde ayd\u0131nlat\u0131c\u0131 g\u00f6revi de g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcne al\u0131narak su\u00e7 vasf\u0131nda bir hata varsa bunu ele\u015ftirisel olarak belirtip karar verilmesi gerekirken tamamen hukuki sonu\u00e7lar\u0131 bak\u0131m\u0131ndan ve sonraki yasal d\u00fczenlemeler konusunda farkl\u0131l\u0131klar yaratacak \u015fekilde vas\u0131ftan bozarak, 307\/4’\u00fc dar yorumlayarak sadece ceza miktar\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnde aleyhe bozma yasa\u011f\u0131na uyularak yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 isteyip istemeyece\u011fi sorununa ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
Konunun a\u00e7\u0131kl\u0131\u011fa kavu\u015fturulmas\u0131 i\u00e7in \u00f6ncelikle hukuk sistemlerinde yer alan “aleyhte de\u011fi\u015ftirme yasa\u011f\u0131” (aleyhe bozma yasa\u011f\u0131) kurumunun hukuksal olarak de\u011ferlendirilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
Mahkemelerce verilen kararlara kar\u015f\u0131 yasa yollar\u0131na ba\u015fvurmak gerek ulusal gerek uluslararas\u0131 metinlerde temel bir hak olarak kabul edilmi\u015ftir.
\nAdalete eri\u015fim bir hak olarak kabul edilmektedir. Adalete eri\u015fim bir hak oldu\u011fu i\u00e7in bu hakk\u0131n kullan\u0131m\u0131 yoluyla yasan\u0131n yorumu, anla\u015f\u0131labilirli\u011fi ve dolay\u0131s\u0131yla yararlan\u0131labilirli\u011fi sa\u011flan\u0131p, i\u00e7tihatlar bu \u015fekilde olu\u015fturulmal\u0131d\u0131r. Haklar\u0131n tan\u0131nmas\u0131 yetmez, hakk\u0131n etkin kullan\u0131m\u0131n\u0131 da sa\u011flanmas\u0131 gerekir.<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131 organlar\u0131n\u0131n adalet da\u011f\u0131tmada ka\u00e7\u0131nma yetkileri yoktur. Anayasam\u0131z bunu \u201chi\u00e7bir mahkeme g\u00f6rev yetkisi i\u00e7indeki davaya bakmaktan ka\u00e7\u0131namaz\u201d bi\u00e7iminde d\u00fczenlemi\u015ftir (m. 36\/2) Adalet da\u011f\u0131t\u0131m\u0131ndan ka\u00e7\u0131n\u0131lmas\u0131, hakk\u0131 teslim etmekten ka\u00e7\u0131nmak demektir.<\/p>\n
Adalete eri\u015fim hakk\u0131 yarg\u0131ya ba\u015fvurma (dava a\u00e7ma), g\u00fcvence olu\u015fturan yasa yollar\u0131na ba\u015fvurma ve yarg\u0131 kararlar\u0131n\u0131n uygulanmas\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flama isteme haklar\u0131n\u0131 g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na almaktad\u0131r. Temyiz yasa yolu, eri\u015fim hakk\u0131n\u0131n adli yarg\u0131da zirveye ula\u015fmas\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamaktad\u0131r (Coulon, Jean-Marie\/Roche, Marie-Anne Frison, s.443)<\/p>\n
Anayasan\u0131n 90. maddesi uyar\u0131nca uyulmas\u0131 zorunlu olan A\u0130HS Ek-7 protokol\u00fcnde yasal \u00e7arelere ba\u015fvurmak bir hak olarak d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir. Yasal yollara ba\u015fvurulurken h\u00fckm\u00fcn aleyhine daha da a\u011f\u0131rla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131labilece\u011fi kabul edildi\u011finden san\u0131k daha fazla ceza alabilece\u011fi korkusuyla yasal yollara ba\u015fvurmaktan \u00e7ekinebilecek, belki de haks\u0131z bir mahkumiyet h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fc kabul etmek zorunda kalacakt\u0131r. Bu sak\u0131ncan\u0131n \u00f6n\u00fcne ge\u00e7ilebilmesi amac\u0131yla bir\u00e7ok \u00fclkede ve \u00fclkemizde san\u0131k lehine temyiz veya istinaf yoluna ba\u015fvuruldu\u011funda h\u00fckm\u00fcn san\u0131k aleyhine de\u011fi\u015ftirilemeyece\u011fi kabul edilmi\u015ftir. Aleyhe de\u011fi\u015ftirme yasa\u011f\u0131 ilkesinin amac\u0131 san\u0131\u011f\u0131n sonu\u00e7ta daha k\u00f6t\u00fc bir duruma d\u00fc\u015fmek korkusuna kap\u0131lmaks\u0131z\u0131n yasal yollara ba\u015fvurma hakk\u0131n\u0131 kullanmas\u0131na imkan tan\u0131makt\u0131r (Yarg\u0131tay Ceza Genel Kurulu, 22.03.2982 tarih, 1981\/1-376, 1982\/99 say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131).<\/p>\n
Bu h\u00fck\u00fcmle ilgili d\u00fczenleme 1412 say\u0131l\u0131 Ceza Muhakemeleri Kanununun 326\/son maddesinde; “H\u00fck\u00fcm yaln\u0131z san\u0131k taraf\u0131ndan veya onun lehine Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131 veya 291. maddede g\u00f6sterilen kimseler taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmi\u015fse yeniden verilen h\u00fck\u00fcm, evvelki h\u00fck\u00fcmle tayn edilmi\u015f olan cezadan daha a\u011f\u0131r olamaz” denilmektedir. Ayn\u0131 h\u00fck\u00fcm 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 CMK’n\u0131n 307\/5. maddesinde; “H\u00fck\u00fcm yaln\u0131z san\u0131k taraf\u0131ndan veya onun lehine Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131 veya 262 nci maddede g\u00f6sterilen kimselerce temyiz edilmi\u015fse, yeniden verilen h\u00fck\u00fcm, \u00f6nceki h\u00fck\u00fcmle belirlenmi\u015f olan cezadan daha a\u011f\u0131r olamaz.” Yine CMK’n\u0131n Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015fvuru sonucunun kapsam\u0131 ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 265. maddesinde; “Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan aleyhine kanun yoluna gidilen karar, san\u0131k lehine bozulabilir veya de\u011fi\u015ftirilebilir. Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131, kanun yoluna san\u0131k lehine ba\u015fvurdu\u011funda, yeniden verilen h\u00fck\u00fcm \u00f6nceki h\u00fck\u00fcmde tayin edilmi\u015f olan cezadan daha a\u011f\u0131r bir cezay\u0131 i\u00e7eremez.” Buna g\u00f6re, h\u00fck\u00fcm san\u0131k veya san\u0131k lehine Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131 veyahut CMK’n\u0131n 262. maddesinde yaz\u0131l\u0131 san\u0131\u011f\u0131n yasal temsilcisi veyahut e\u015fi taraf\u0131ndan san\u0131k lehine temyiz edilmi\u015f ise, bozma karar\u0131ndan sonra ilk kurulan h\u00fck\u00fcmde yer alan cezadan daha a\u011f\u0131r bir ceza tayin edilemeyecektir.<\/p>\n
Aleyhte bozma yasa\u011f\u0131 ancak h\u00fckm\u00fcn yaln\u0131zca san\u0131k lehine istinaf veya temyiz yoluna ba\u015fvurmas\u0131 halinde uygulama olana\u011f\u0131 bulabilir. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla san\u0131k aleyhine bir temyiz mevcut ise kural\u0131 uygulama imkan\u0131 yoktur. San\u0131k aleyhine temyizde h\u00fckm\u00fcn san\u0131k aleyhine bozulmas\u0131 m\u00fcmk\u00fcnd\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay bir\u00e7ok karar\u0131nda san\u0131k lehine temyiz yoluna ba\u015fvuruldu\u011funda, san\u0131k aleyhindeki hususlar\u0131n onun i\u00e7in kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak te\u015fkil etti\u011fini belirtmi\u015ftir. Y\u00fcksek Mahkememize g\u00f6re temyiz davas\u0131n\u0131 a\u00e7an san\u0131k ve onun lehine yasa yoluna ba\u015fvuranlar karar\u0131 san\u0131k lehine d\u00fczeltmek amac\u0131yla hareket ettiklerinden bu amac\u0131 g\u00f6z ard\u0131 etmek ve aleyhe de\u011fi\u015ftirmeye olanak tan\u0131mak adalet ve hakkaniyet ilkelerine ayk\u0131r\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
San\u0131k ve onun lehine Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131, e\u015fi veya kanuni temsilcisi taraf\u0131ndan temyiz yasa yoluna yap\u0131lan ba\u015fvurunun san\u0131k aleyhine sonu\u00e7 do\u011furaca\u011f\u0131 kabul edilirse san\u0131k daha fazla ceza alma korkusuyla yasa yoluna ba\u015fvurmaktan \u00e7ekinecek, belki de haks\u0131z bir h\u00fckme raz\u0131 olacakt\u0131r. Bu korkuyu ve sak\u0131ncay\u0131 ortadan kald\u0131rmak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesiyle san\u0131k lehine temyizde h\u00fckm\u00fcn san\u0131k aleyhine de\u011fi\u015ftirilemeyece\u011fi “Reformatio in Peius” ilkesi bir usul kural\u0131 olarak yarg\u0131lama yasalar\u0131nda yer alm\u0131\u015f bulunmaktad\u0131r. Di\u011fer bir ifadeyle aleyhte de\u011fi\u015ftirme yasa\u011f\u0131n\u0131n amac\u0131, kanun yoluna ba\u015fvuracak olan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n sonu\u00e7ta daha k\u00f6t\u00fc bir duruma d\u00fc\u015fmek korkusuna kap\u0131lmaks\u0131z\u0131n bu hakk\u0131n\u0131 serbest\u00e7e kullanabilmesini sa\u011flamakt\u0131r. O nedenle, bu kural, korku duyulmadan yasa yollar\u0131na ba\u015fvurma ilkesi (principle of appeal without fear) olarak da adland\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r (Ceza Muhakemesinde Aleyhte De\u011fi\u015ftirme Yasa\u011f\u0131, Seydi Kaymaz).<\/p>\n
Nitekim; Yarg\u0131tay Ceza Genel Kurulu, 22.03.2982 tarih, 1981\/1-376, 1982\/99 say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda; “San\u0131k kanun yoluna m\u00fcracaat etti\u011finde karar\u0131 kendi lehine d\u00fczelttirmek gayesiyle hareket eder. Bu gayeyi tan\u0131mamak ve aksi y\u00f6n\u00fcndeki d\u00fczeltmeye cevap vermek adalet esaslar\u0131na ters d\u00fc\u015fer. Yaln\u0131z san\u0131k lehine temyiz yoluna ba\u015fvuruldu\u011fu anda san\u0131k aleyhindeki hususlar san\u0131k i\u00e7in m\u00fcktesap hak olmu\u015ftur. Hem m\u00fcktesap hakk\u0131 kabul etmek hem de bu hakk\u0131 tahakkuk etti\u011fi andan itibaren de\u011fil de temyiz incelemesinden sonraki yeniden h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131 a\u015famas\u0131na g\u00f6t\u00fcrmek ve sadece ceza miktar\u0131n\u0131 hasretmek; kanun vaz\u0131\u0131 aksini irade etmedi\u011fi halde, do\u011fmu\u015f bir hakk\u0131n do\u011fdu\u011fu andan itibaren h\u00fck\u00fcm ve netice tevlit etme niteli\u011fini de\u011fi\u015ftirmek k\u0131s\u0131tlamak olur. Bu k\u0131s\u0131tlama kanun gerek\u00e7esinde vurgulanan m\u00fcktesap hak kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak kavram\u0131na ters d\u00fc\u015fer.”
\nYarg\u0131tay Ceza Genel Kurulumuz lehe temyiz davas\u0131 \u00fczerine aleyhe d\u00fczeltmeme zorunlulu\u011funa a\u00e7\u0131kl\u0131k getirmi\u015f ve CMUK’un 326\/2. maddesindeki “H\u00fck\u00fcm s\u00f6z\u00fcn\u00fc sadece kapsad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ceza miktar\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnde de\u011fil, ilk h\u00fck\u00fcmdeki uygulamalar y\u00f6n\u00fcnde d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnerek geni\u015f anlamas\u0131 gerekece\u011fini” (15.03.1971 g\u00fcn ve 4-86), “ilk h\u00fck\u00fcm san\u0131k taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmeyerek kesinle\u015fmi\u015f olsayd\u0131 durum ne olacak idiyse, lehe temyizin bu durumu de\u011fi\u015ftirmemesi gerekti\u011fini,” (19.06.1967 g\u00fcn ve 114-162, 13.04.1964 g\u00fcn ve 167), “temyiz incelemesinde \u00f6ncelikle temyizin lehe veya aleyhe mi oldu\u011fu tespit edilerek, incelemenin buna g\u00f6re yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fini, san\u0131k lehine tecelli edecek bir hatan\u0131n tazammum edece\u011fi hukuki neticelerin aleyhte tevess\u00fclatta bulunmad\u0131k\u00e7a de\u011fi\u015ftirilemeyece\u011fini,” (31.01.1949 g\u00fcn ve 171-35) vurgulam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu a\u00e7\u0131klamalar \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda somut olay de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde; Yerel Mahkemece, san\u0131k hakk\u0131nda lehe oldu\u011fu kabul edilen 5237 say\u0131l\u0131 TCK’n\u0131n 81, 35\/2, 29 ve 62. maddeleri uyar\u0131nca sonu\u00e7ta 9 y\u0131l 1 ay 15 g\u00fcn hapis cezas\u0131 tayin edilmi\u015ftir. Yerel mahkemenin bu uygulamas\u0131nda, an\u0131lan Yasan\u0131n 62. maddesi ile indirim yap\u0131l\u0131rken, hesap hatas\u0131 yap\u0131lmas\u0131 suretiyle 9 y\u0131l 4 ay 15 g\u00fcn yerine, 9 y\u0131l 1 ay 15 g\u00fcn olarak eksik ceza tayin edilmi\u015ftir. Yerel mahkemenin hatal\u0131 olan ilk ve son uygulamas\u0131 yaln\u0131zca san\u0131k ve san\u0131k m\u00fcadfii taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmi\u015ftir. Aleyhe temyiz bulunmamas\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, \u00d6zel Dairece 1412 say\u0131l\u0131 CYUY’n\u0131n 322. maddesi uyar\u0131nca yap\u0131lan uygulama ile Yerel Mahkemece verilen h\u00fck\u00fcmdeki cezadan daha a\u011f\u0131r bir ceza belirlenmesi 1412 say\u0131l\u0131 CYUY.n\u0131n 326\/son ve 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 CYY.n\u0131n 307\/4. maddesine ayk\u0131r\u0131d\u0131r.” CGK, 07.10.2008, 2008\/1-198 E, 2008\/211 K)<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay vermi\u015f oldu\u011fu daha eski bir karar\u0131nda;<\/p>\n
“1-CMUK.nun 326. maddesindeki “H\u00dcK\u00dcM” s\u00f6z\u00fcn\u00fc sadece kapsad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ceza miktar\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden de\u011fil, ilk h\u00fck\u00fcmdeki uygulamalar y\u00f6n\u00fcnden de d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnerek geni\u015f anlamak gerekir. (CGK.nun 15.3.1971 g\u00fcn ve 4184 say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131)<\/p>\n
2-\u0130lk h\u00fck\u00fcm san\u0131k taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmeyerek kesinle\u015fmi\u015f olsayd\u0131 durum ne olacak idiyse lehe temyizin bu DURUMU (cezay\u0131 de\u011fil) de\u011fi\u015ftirmemesi” gerekti\u011fine h\u00fckmetmi\u015ftir. (CGK. 22.2.1982, 376\/99)<\/p>\n
Aleyhe de\u011fi\u015ftirme yasa\u011f\u0131 uyar\u0131nca san\u0131\u011f\u0131n aleyhine de\u011fi\u015ftirilemeyecek olan hususlar yaln\u0131zca “ceza miktar\u0131 m\u0131d\u0131r?”, yoksa ceza d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda \u00e7e\u015fitli hak ve \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fckleri s\u0131n\u0131rlayan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n aleyhine sonu\u00e7 do\u011furabilecek di\u011fer yapt\u0131r\u0131mlar ve kurallar bu kapsama dahil midir?<\/p>\n
Bu sorun esas itibariyle aleyhe bozma yasa\u011f\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131r ve kapsam\u0131n\u0131n ne oldu\u011fuyla ilgili oldu\u011fu ve bunun do\u011fru yan\u0131tlanmas\u0131 i\u00e7in aleyhe de\u011fi\u015ftirme yasa\u011f\u0131n\u0131n amac\u0131n\u0131n ne oldu\u011funu bilmekten ge\u00e7ti\u011fini, zira aleyhe bozma yasa\u011f\u0131n\u0131n amac\u0131 san\u0131k ve san\u0131k lehine yasa yoluna ba\u015fvuran ki\u015fileri san\u0131\u011f\u0131n aleyhine bir sonu\u00e7 ile kar\u015f\u0131la\u015facaklar\u0131 korkusunu ya\u015famaks\u0131z\u0131n adalete eri\u015fim haklar\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda yasa yollar\u0131na ba\u015fvurmalar\u0131n\u0131 temin etmektir. Bu y\u00f6nde bakt\u0131\u011f\u0131m\u0131zda yaln\u0131zca ceza de\u011fil, bu korkuya neden olabilecek di\u011fer yapt\u0131r\u0131mlar bak\u0131m\u0131ndan da aleyhe de\u011fi\u015ftirme yasa\u011f\u0131n\u0131n kabul edilmesi gerekti\u011fi sonucuna ula\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, yani aleyhte bozma yasa\u011f\u0131n\u0131n kabul edilmesinin gerek\u00e7esi san\u0131\u011f\u0131n daha a\u011f\u0131r bir cezayla kar\u015f\u0131la\u015fma korkusu ta\u015f\u0131madan temyiz yasa yoluna ba\u015fvurmas\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamak oldu\u011funa g\u00f6re bozma karar\u0131ndan sonraki san\u0131\u011f\u0131n durumunun yasa yoluna ba\u015fvurmadan \u00f6nceki durumundan daha k\u00f6t\u00fc olmamas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi sonucuna ula\u015f\u0131l\u0131r. Nitekim Yarg\u0131tay Ceza Genel Kurulu 07.10.2008 tarih, 2008\/1-198 E, 2008\/211 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 ilam\u0131nda belirtti\u011fi gibi “\u0130lk h\u00fck\u00fcm san\u0131k taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmeyerek kesinle\u015fmi\u015f olsayd\u0131 durum ne olacak idiyse, lehe temyizin bu durumu de\u011fi\u015ftirmemesi gerekti\u011fine h\u00fckmetmi\u015ftir.”<\/p>\n
Nitekim baz\u0131 \u00fclkelerde aleyhe de\u011fi\u015ftirme yasa\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ceza ve cezan\u0131n sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 kapsad\u0131\u011f\u0131 konusunda a\u00e7\u0131k yasal d\u00fczenlemeler yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Alman Ceza Muhakemesi Kanunu 330\/1 maddesinde, san\u0131k, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n yasal temsilcisi veya savc\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan san\u0131k lehine temyiz yoluna ba\u015fvuruldu\u011funda fiilin hukuksal yapt\u0131r\u0131m\u0131n t\u00fcr ve miktar itibariyle san\u0131k lehine de\u011fi\u015ftirilemeyece\u011fi belirtilmektedir. Yapt\u0131r\u0131m kapsam\u0131na ceza girdi\u011fi gibi, g\u00fcvenlik tedbirleri ve ceza mahkumiyetinin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131 da girmektedir.<\/p>\n
Aleyhe bozma yasa\u011f\u0131n\u0131n kabul g\u00f6rmemesinin nedeni olarak “su\u00e7lular\u0131n etkin bir \u015fekilde cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n gerekmesi ve bozulan toplum bar\u0131\u015f\u0131n\u0131n yeniden sa\u011flanmak istenmesi” g\u00f6sterilmektedir. Ancak bizzat yarg\u0131 eliyle hak arama \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn k\u0131s\u0131tlanmas\u0131 sonucu hukuk d\u00fczenimize kar\u015f\u0131 olu\u015fan g\u00fcvensizlik daha a\u011f\u0131r sonu\u00e7lar do\u011furacakt\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Sonu\u00e7 olarak; su\u00e7 vasf\u0131na ili\u015fkin hukuksal ele\u015ftiri yap\u0131larak yetinilmesi gerekirken aleyhe bozma yasa\u011f\u0131 kurumunun amac\u0131na, ruhuna ve konulu\u015f amac\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131 olarak hak arama \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc k\u0131s\u0131tlamas\u0131na yol a\u00e7acak \u015fekilde yerel mahkeme karar\u0131n\u0131n bozulmas\u0131na karar verilmesi usul ve kanuna ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011fundan \u00e7o\u011funluk g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne i\u015ftirak edilmemi\u015ftir.
\n\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u200bYarg\u0131tay 3. Ceza Dairesi\u2019nin 15.09.2021 tarihli, 2021\/2002 E. ve 2021\/8559 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131\u00a0Hukuki Haber<\/p>\n
Haberin Al\u0131nt\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131 Kaynak: www.hukukihaber.net<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
T.C. Yarg\u0131tay 3. Ceza Dairesi 2021\/2002 E., 2021\/8559 K. “\u0130\u00e7tihat Metni” Mahkemesi :Ceza Dairesi \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesi : … 2. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesinin 20.05.2019 tarih ve 2017\/304 – 2019\/253 say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131 Su\u00e7 : Silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma H\u00fck\u00fcm : TCK\u2019n\u0131n 314\/2, 3713 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanunun 3, 5\/1,TCK\u2019n\u0131n 62\/1, 58\/9, 53\/1, 63. maddeleri gere\u011fince mahkumiyete dair istinaf ba\u015fvurusunun esastan reddi Temyiz edenlen : San\u0131k ve m\u00fcdafii B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesince verilen h\u00fck\u00fcm temyiz edilmekle; Temyiz edenin s\u0131fat\u0131, ba\u015fvurunun s\u00fcresi, karar\u0131n niteli\u011fi ve temyiz sebebine g\u00f6re dosya incelendi, gere\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcld\u00fc; Ceza s\u00fcresi y\u00f6n\u00fcnden yasal \u015fartlar\u0131 olu\u015fmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan; san\u0131\u011f\u0131n duru\u015fmal\u0131 inceleme isteminin CMK’n\u0131n 299. maddesi uyar\u0131nca REDD\u0130NE, Temyiz talebinin reddi nedenleri bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan i\u015fin esas\u0131na ge\u00e7ildi; Vicdani kan\u0131n\u0131n olu\u015ftu\u011fu duru\u015fma s\u00fcrecini yans\u0131tan tutanaklar, belgeler ve gerek\u00e7e i\u00e7eri\u011fine g\u00f6re yap\u0131lan incelemede; \u00d6rg\u00fct yap\u0131lanmas\u0131 i\u00e7erisinde, … il imaml\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6revi \u00fcstlenen san\u0131\u011f\u0131n eyleminin, \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn hiyerar\u015fik yap\u0131s\u0131 i\u00e7erisindeki konum ve g\u00f6revi, sorumluluk sahas\u0131nda sevk ve idare etti\u011fi \u00f6rg\u00fctsel faaliyetlerin \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn ama\u00e7 ve etkinli\u011fi bak\u0131m\u0131ndan \u00f6nem ve yo\u011funlu\u011fu g\u00f6zetildi\u011finde TCK’n\u0131n 314\/1 maddesinde yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u201cSilahl\u0131 Ter\u00f6r \u00d6rg\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fc Y\u00f6netme\u201d su\u00e7unu olu\u015fturdu\u011fu g\u00f6zetilmeden su\u00e7 vasf\u0131nda d\u00fc\u015f\u00fclen yan\u0131lg\u0131 sonucu yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131, Bozmay\u0131 gerektirmi\u015f, san\u0131k ve m\u00fcdafiinin temyiz itirazlar\u0131 bu itibarla yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015f oldu\u011fundan h\u00fckm\u00fcn bu sebeplerden dolay\u0131 CMK’n\u0131n 302\/2. maddesi uyar\u0131nca BOZULMASINA, CMK’n\u0131n …<\/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-35410","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n